1993 amendments to the Constitution of Malaysia

Part of a series on the
History of Malaysia
Prehistoric period Paleolithic  Lenggong Valley c. 2,000,0000 BCE  Mansuli Valley 235,000 BCE Mesolithic  Niah cultures 65,000–40,000 BCE Neolithic  Bewah man/woman 16,000 BCE  Perak man/woman 11,000–200 BCE  Neolithic Klang 500 – 200 BCE
Early kingdoms Ancient Kedah <100 BCE Chi Tu 100 BCE–642 CE Langkasuka 100 BCE–1474 CE Gangga Negara c. 100 CE–1025 Pan Pan 424–775 Old Kedah 170–1135 Old Pahang 449–1454 Srivijaya 700s–1025 Majapahit 1300s
Rise of Muslim states Kedah Sultanate 1136–present Samudera Pasai Sultanate 1267–1521 Brunei Sultanate 1368–present Malacca Sultanate 1402–1511 Sulu Sultanate 1450–1899 Pahang Sultanate 1470–1623 Aceh Sultanate 1496–1903 Pattani Sultanate 1516– 1902 Johor Sultanate 1528–present Sarawak Sultanate 1599–1641 Selangor Sultanate 1766–present Besut Kingdom 1780–1899 Setul Kingdom 1808–1916 Reman Kingdom 1810–1902 Kubang Pasu Kingdom 1839–1864
Colonial period Portuguese Malacca 1511–1641 Dutch–Portuguese War 1601–1661 Dutch Malacca 1641–1824 Pahang Kingdom 1770–1881 Straits Settlements 1786–1946 Siamese invasion of Kedah 1821–1826 Anglo-Dutch Treaty 1824 Burney Treaty 1826 Naning War 1831–1832 Kingdom of Sarawak 1841–1946 Separation of Perlis from Kedah 1843 Crown Colony of Labuan 1848–1946 Pahang Civil War 1857–1863 Larut Wars 1861–1874 Klang War 1867–1874 Pangkor Treaty 1874 Perak War 1875–1876 British Malaya / Borneo 1874–1946 Jementah Civil War 1879 North Borneo 1882–1946 Pahang Uprising 1891–1895 Mat Salleh Rebellion 1894–1905 Federated Malay States 1895–1946 Anglo-Siamese Treaty 1909 Unfederated Malay States 1909–1946 Battle of Penang 1914 Kelantan rebellion 1915
World War II Japanese occupation of Malaya / Borneo 1941–1945 Malayan campaign 1941–1942 Bornean Campaign 1941–1942 Battle of Muar 1942 Parit Sulong Massacre 1942 Battle of Singapore 1942 Sook Ching 1942 Syburi 1942 Sandakan Death Marches 1942–1945 Si Rat Malai 1943–1945 Jesselton revolt 1943–1944
Formative period BMA of Malaya/Borneo 1945–1946 Crown Colony of N. Borneo/Sarawak 1946–1963 Anti-cession movement 1946–1963 Malayan Union 1946–1948 Federation of Malaya 1948–1963 Malayan Emergency 1948–1960 Baling Talks 1955
Independence period Malayan Independence 1957 Singapore self-governance 1959 ISA 1960 1960–2012 Sarawak Insurgency 1962–1990 North Borneo self-governance 1963 Konfrontasi 1963–1966 Sarawak self-governance 1963 Formation of Malaysia 1963 Singapore in Malaysia 1963–1965 ASEAN Declaration 1967 Second communist insurgency 1968–1989
Modern period 13 May incident 1969 National Operations Council 1969–1971 Declaration of Rukun Negara 1970 New Economic Policy 1971–1990 Federal Territory of KL 1974 1977 Kelantan Emergency 1977 Pedra Branca dispute 1979–2008 South China Sea dispute (Spratly) 1980–present Dawn Raid 1981 Federal Territory of Labuan 1984 Memali incident 1985 Operation Lalang 1987 Constitutional crisis 1987–1988 Peace Agreement of Hat Yai 1989 Royal Immunity Amendments 1993 Asian financial crisis 1997–1998 Reformasi Movement 1998–2022 2008 Malaysian Opposition Wave 2008 H1N1 flu pandemic 2009–2010 Sedition Dragnet 2014 1MDB scandal 2015–present Pakatan Harapan takeover 2018 COVID-19 pandemic 2020–2022 Political crisis 2020–2022 Bornean Amendment 2021–2023 Green Wave 2022–present
Incidents Brunei revolt 1962–1966 North Borneo dispute (Philippine militant attacks) 1962–present Singapore race riots 1964 Brunei's Limbang claim 1967–2009 Penang Hartal riot 1967 13 May Incident 1969 Ligitan and Sipadan dispute 1969–2002 Kuala Lumpur flash floods 1971 Malaysian haze crisis 1972–present AIA building hostage crisis 1975 National Monument bombing 1975 Campbell Shopping Complex fire 1976 Sabah Air GAF Nomad crash 1976 Japan Airlines Flight 715 incident 1977 MH653 incident 1977 1985 Lahad Datu ambush 1985 Memali Incident 1985 Sabah Emergency 1986 Ming Court Affair 1987 Penang terminal bridge collapse 1988 Taufiqiah Al-Khairiah madrasa fire 1989 Bright Sparklers disaster 1991 Highland Towers collapse 1993 Genting landslide 1995 MH2133 incident 1995 Pos Dipang mudflow 1996 Tropical Storm Greg 1996 1998–1999 Malaysia Nipah virus outbreak 1998–1999 2000 Sipadan kidnappings 2000 Al-Ma'unah incident 2000 Sauk Siege 2000 2001 Kampung Medan riots 2001 2002 Taman Hillview landslide 2002 Indian Ocean tsunami 2004 2006–2007 Southeast Asian floods 2006–2007 Bukit Gantang bus crash 2007 Bukit Antarabangsa landslide 2008 H1N1 flu pandemic 2009 Attacks against places of worship 2010 Cameron Highlands bus crash 2010 Hulu Langat landslide 2011 Genting Highlands bus crash 2013 MH370 incident 2014 MH17 incident 2014 2014–15 Malaysia floods 2014–2015 Sabah earthquake 2015 2015 Plaza Low Yat riot 2015 Movida Bar grenade attack 2016 Kim Jong-nam's Assassination 2017 Darul Quran madrasa fire 2017 2018 Subang Temple riot 2018 2020-21 Malaysia floods 2021 LRT train collision 2021 2021-22 Malaysia floods 2021–2022 2022 Batang Kali landslide 2022 2023 Elmina plane crash 2023 2024 Lumut helicopters crash 2024 2024 Ulu Tiram police station attack 2024
By topic Communications Constitutional Economic Immigration Legal Military
By region Kedah Kuala Lumpur Penang George Town Sabah Sarawak
Malaysia portal
v t e

This article is part of a series about Mahathir Mohamad
Political positions Awards and honours Prime Minister of Malaysia First term (1981–2003) North-South Expressway MSC Malaysia Proton Holdings Wawasan 2020 National Development Policy 1993 constitutional amendment Bangsa Malaysia Operation Haze IMT-GT Reformasi "Asian values" Putrajaya Petronas Towers Second term (2018–2020) Shared Prosperity Vision 2030 International trips THM fund Borneo states bill 2020 political crisis Cabinets I II III IV V VI VII Political parties UMNO (1964–2016) BERSATU (2016–2020) PEJUANG (2020–2023) PUTRA (2023–present) Coalitions Alliance Party (1964–1974) Barisan Nasional (1974–2016) Pakatan Harapan (2017–2020) Gerakan Tanah Air (2022–2023) Family Siti Hasmah Mohamad Ali Mukhriz Mahathir Mokhzani Mahathir Marina Mahathir Related KL War Crimes Commission The Malay Dilemma Citizens' Declaration Asian values Teater Tun Siti Hasmah Mahathir, the Musical Mahathir Science Award Gallery Quotes
v t e

The 1993 amendments to the Constitution of Malaysia^[1][2] were passed by the Malaysian parliament with the aim of removing legal immunity of the royalty. The changes, which saw the amendments of Articles 32, 38, 42, 63, 72 and 181 in the Constitution of Malaysia,^[3] were implemented in March 1993. Before the amendments were made, the Constitution granted rulers who have violated the law not to be prosecuted by the criminal court unless he voluntarily wishes to surrender his legal immunity.^[4]

The amendments were made at a time when the Malaysian monarchy witnessed a deteriorating relationship with the Malaysian government. During the late-1980s and the early-1990s, a series of controversial incidents involving the rulers cropped up, many of which came into a conflict of interest with several politicians.^[5] After two separate assault incidents by the Sultan of Johor and his younger son which occurred in 1992, the government was prompted to take up the initiative to call for the removal of legal immunity. The rulers were extremely unhappy with the government's calls for the removal of legal immunity, and initially dissented with the government. The government used a two-pronged approach of persuasion and coercion to obtain the assent of the rulers for their rulers. The rulers gave their assent for the government's proposals to remove the legal immunity, which was later implemented in March 1993.

By some interpretations, these events leading up to the constitutional amendments was considered to be a constitutional crisis,^[6] given that the federal government, who needed the endorsement of the Sultans to implement the law, refused and subsequently led to a brief standoff between both sides.^[7] However, in most cases, the events leading up to the constitutional amendment was generally closely identified as a monarchy crisis rather than a constitutional crisis.^[8]

In later part of the year, two connected assault incidents involving members of the Johor royal family occurred.^[9] The first one occurred on 10 July 1992, when the second son of the Sultan Iskandar, the Sultan of Johor, Tunku Abdul Majid, hit a Perak hockey goalkeeper, Mohamed Jaafar shortly after a hockey championship match between Perak and Johor, supposedly having lost his temper when the Perak team won the match by a penalty stroke.^[10][11] The goalkeeper made a police report soon afterward which received attention from Parliament who pressured the Malaysian Hockey Confederation to issue Tunku Majid in October 1992, a ban of five years participation in any national hockey tournaments.^[12] The Sultan, enraged by the decision issued to his son, exerted pressure on the state education department to issue orders to school hockey teams in Johor to boycott participation in national tournaments.^[13] The decision upset Douglas Gomez, a hockey coach, who criticised the education department for destroying the leadership and called for the resignation of all key office bearers of the Johor Hockey Association.^[14]

The criticisms by Gomez made the Sultan angry, so he summoned Gomez to the palace on 30 November where he was reprimanded and beaten by the Sultan, in front of his dumbstruck bodyguards,^[15] members of the Johor Military Force (JMF). Gomez, who suffered injuries to his face and stomach, sought treatment at a private clinic the following day and subsequently filed a police report on 6 December,^[16] after receiving tacit support from Parliament. The government-backed media, on its part, was swift to report on the incident.^[15]

The party leader of Semangat 46, Tengku Razaleigh Tengku Mohd Hamzah, was a member of the Kelantan royal family and was held by high-esteem by the Sultan of Kelantan, Sultan Ismail Petra. Sultan Ismail Petra allegedly campaigned for Semangat 46 during the 1990 Malaysian general elections, which resulted in Semangat 46 as well as its then-coalition partner, the Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS) wrestling over control of the Kelantan's state government from the Barisan Nasional government. The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Mahathir Mohamad, expressed his unhappiness over the alleged royal support for Semangat 46, and was accused of violating the rule of political neutrality which was required by a constitutional monarch.^[5]

In March 1992, customs officials revealed that Sultan Ismail Petra had owed the government RM$2.1 million in import duties after he had purchased a convoy of twenty Lamborghini Diablo cars that were directly flown in from London. The Sultan firmly denied any wrongdoings on his part, and further issued a statement declaring support for the implementation of Islamic laws in the state by the PAS-led state government, which angered the BN-led federal government.^[17]

The press reports on Gomez plight widespread moral outrage within the Malaysian public.^[18] A special parliamentary session was held on 10 December 1992 which saw all 96 members of the Dewan Rakyat present to pass a unanimous resolution to curb the powers of the rulers if necessary. The subsequent parliamentary session on 27 December saw discussions to remove legal immunity which agitated Sultan Iskandar to hold a rally to oppose the government's actions, but was forced to cancel after intense government pressure.^[19] Members of the opposition party had a passive stance towards the government's proposals, particularly from Semangat 46.^[20][21]

A ruler's session was held on 16 January 1993, the following year, which requested the government for additional time for consideration of the government's decision. After extensive negotiation, some rulers chose to refuse to endorse the proposed changes to the Federal Constitution, even after the offer for a special court to prosecute the rulers was proposed,^[22] claiming that the implementation of a special court would bring about difficulties in legal technicalities.^[23][24]

The proposed amendments also came with the rule to allow commoners to criticise the Sultans, even the Yang di-Pertuan Agong without fear of the Sedition Act, with the exception of questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy of Malaysia.^[22][25] In addition, the proposed amendments also sought to limit the power of the rulers to pardon offences of family members.^[26] Public criticisms of the rulers was also allowed by amendments to the Sedition Act, which makes it no longer an offence to criticise the royalty except to areas pertaining to their legitimate existence.^[27]

Nevertheless, parliamentary sessions on subsequent days saw the Dewan Rakyat table the proposed amendments in spite of the Sultans' objections, citing as far to say that there was no need to obtain royal assent to implement laws.^[28] Back in 1983, the constitution had been amended so that a veto by the Agong can be over-ridden by a parliamentary vote.^[26][29] Shortly before the Dewan Rakyat concluded its session, 133 out of 180 MPs passed the proposed changes although members of the opposition parties abstained from voting, citing indifferences.^[30] The following day, Dewan Negara passed a unanimous resolution to approve of the proposed amendments.^[31]

The three rulers, on the other hand, continued to withhold their consent to the amendments which saw the government threatening to withdraw the privileges and continued attacks via the national media^[32] on instances of royal excesses of their extravagant lifestyles and even hinting a possibility of ending constitutional monarchy in Malaysia, such as the publication of an article of monarchs who abdicated or were disposed since World War II.^[33] A compromise was reached with the Agong when the government offered a compromise which allowed the rulers to delay any legislation within sixty days, provided that the delays were given reasons. The previous proposals offered only a delay of fifteen days for any legislation that were to be raised in parliament.^[34]

The Dewan Rakyat passed its implementation on 8 March 1993, while the Dewan Negara approved of its implementation on 30 March. A new chapter, Part XV of the Constitution entitled "Proceedings against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Rulers" was also enshrined.^[35]

The government-backed media, on its part, launched a series of reports between 1992 and 1993 detailing alleged misdeeds by members of the royalty not only by the Johor royal family^[36] but also on other royal houses from other states, questioning their extravagant lifestyles and misuse of moral authority to gain alleged concessions. The Pahang royal family, in particular, was criticised for the way which they allegedly gained favourable timber forestry concession rates^[37] and the unusually high shares which they were accorded in the timber forestry industry.^[38]

The views of the Islamic Religious leaders were also well publicised, who criticised the royal excesses and even went as far as placing members of the royalty as equal members with the commoners in the eyes of Allah.^[39][40][41]

In Kelantan, Sultan Ismail Petra was also heavily criticised for failing to pay import duty taxes after he purchased a convoy of imported Italian luxury sports car as well as^[25][42] alleged biased support for Semangat 46 by Dr Mahathir, for violating the constitution which states that monarchs will have to take on a neutral role in political affairs. The leader of Semangat 46, Tengku Razaleigh Tengku Mohd Hamzah was a member of the Kelantan royal family.^[43]

Another further constitutional amendment in May 1994 allowed any law that has been passed by both the Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara to become law within 30 days, irrespective of whether the Agong had given his assent.^[44][45] The new legislation further reduced the veto power of the Agong — amended previously in 1983, which also sparked a constitutional crisis. The older bill stated that Rulers could withhold assent of a proposed amendment within 30 days once both houses of parliament pass a proposed amendment.^[46]

The new constitutional amendment took some interesting twists following its amendments: In 1996, a Singaporean filed to sue the Sultan Ahmad Shah of Pahang for defamation in the special court for the rulers, which was turned down by the Special Court, establishing the precedent that the right to sue a ruler only belongs to a Malaysian citizen.

In 1998, then Tengku Idris (later Sultan Sharafuddin) of Selangor sued a company, Dikim Holdings in the High Court. In 1999, when his father, Sultan Salahuddin was elected as the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (Paramount Ruler) of Malaysia, Tengku Idris was appointed as Regent of Selangor. The case was referred to the Federal Court on whether the Regent is considered a ruler, which the court replied in the negative. In 2001, Sultan Salahuddin died and Tengku Idris ascended the Selangor throne. The case was referred to the Federal Court again, which the court ruled that the High Court had lost jurisdiction over the case, and the case must be withdrawn and refiled in the Special Court. In both cases, only the Special Court had authority to exercise jurisdiction over the rulers, whether they were to be tried or intended to try another party.^[47]

The Yang di-Pertuan Besar of Negeri Sembilan, Tuanku Ja'afar became the first ruler to have judgement made against him in the Special Court, whereby he was ordered to settle US$1 million in debts he had owed to a bank.^[48] The landmark verdict prompted his oldest son, the Regent of Negeri Sembilan, Tunku Naquiyuddin to advocate the restoration of rulers' immunity during a speech in November 2008. This raised concerns among the public, in view of the history of past royal excesses, but specifically the Gomez incident. Tunku Naquiyuddin, however, added further that immunity to rulers should not be extended to cases when rulers commit acts of criminality, such as assault.^[49]

• A BILL intituled: An Act to amend the Federal Constitution., Dewan Rakyat, January 1993
• (in Malay) Pindaan-Pindaan YANG DICADANGKAN KEPADA RANG UNDANG-UNDANG PERLEMBAGAAN (PINDAAN) 1993, Dewan Rakyat, January 1993