MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4238053533 · doi:10.52282/icr.v1i3.729

Implementing Islamic Law Within a Modern Constitutional Framework: Challenges and Problems in Contemporary Malaysia

2010· article· en· W4238053533 on OpenAlexaff
ICR Admin

Bibliographic record

VenueICR Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Studies and History
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamLawPolitical scienceMalayConstitutionSociologyState (computer science)VaguenessHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While the Federal Constitution of Malaysia readily proclaims Islam to be Malaysia’s official religion, opinions have fiercely diverged among legal scholars and practitioners as to how substantive should the relevant clause on this be interpreted. Such vagueness is typical of the document, whose drafting took place amidst intense negotiations among Malaysia’s multi-racial communities, resulting in an informal bargain or ‘social contract’ which until today has become a subject of bitter dispute amidst rising polarisation along ‘Muslim versus non-Muslim’ lines. Locating origins of contemporaneous legal conflict to divergent understandings of constitutional clauses, this article proceeds to discuss contemporary controversies which shed light on Malaysia’s struggle to identify itself as a nation-state which integrates the best of both modern and Islamic civilisations. It is argued that this delicate balance has been recently threatened by the increasing penetration of a form of orthodox Islamist legalism which antagonises non-Muslim minorities and unduly homogenises its Malay-Muslim population. The cut-off point for this article is Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s tenure as Prime Minister of Malaysia, which drew to a close in April 2009 under embattled circumstances.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score0.738

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.257 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICR JournalSame topicAsian Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207