Constitution still supreme: Hadi’s call to abolish ‘colonial-era’ laws draws pushback

By the Editorial Team · Sunday, September 13, 2026

PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang's call to abolish certain laws labeled as "colonial-era" and fully implement syariah law has faced strong opposition from Malaysian legal experts, civil society leaders, and religious groups defending the supremacy of the Federal Constitution. Critics argue that such changes would undermine Malaysia’s secular constitutional framework, disrupt national unity, and must instead follow established legal amendment procedures.

Calls by PAS president Tan Sri Abdul Hadi Awang to abolish certain laws he described as “colonial-era” and promote the unrestricted implementation of syariah law have sparked significant pushback from various Malaysian legal experts and civil society leaders.

Hadi’s remarks have reignited debate over the role of syariah law within Malaysia’s constitutional framework. Advocates of maintaining the current legal order emphasize the supremacy of the Federal Constitution and caution against any moves that would overhaul the existing system.

Datuk Seri Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, chairman of the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia, challenged the characterization of Malaysia’s laws as “colonial-era,” noting that since Independence, Parliament and state legislatures have amended these laws to reflect the country’s evolving political, social, and economic context. He said a wholesale replacement of the current laws with syariah law would be impractical and run counter to the constitutional philosophy established by Malaysia’s founding leaders. Mohd Hishamudin cited the 1957 Constitutional Proposals, which recognized Islam as the religion of the Federation but maintained Malaya’s status as a secular state.

Former Council of Churches Malaysia general secretary Rev Dr Hermen Shastri also stressed that syariah law already operates within Malaysia’s constitutional framework and is subordinate to the Federal Constitution. He argued any changes to constitutional law must follow the established constitutional amendment processes rather than elevating religious law above the nation’s supreme legal document. According to him, preserving constitutional order includes respecting Islam without undermining the existing legal system.

The call for sweeping legal changes met criticism from former Member of Parliament Tawfik Ismail, who described Hadi’s proposal as presumptuous and an encroachment on the traditional role of the Malay Rulers concerning Islamic matters. Tawfik contended that Hadi’s position, by not providing sufficient justification, risks harming Islam’s image and fueling Islamophobia.

Legal advocate Anas Zubedy echoed these sentiments, emphasizing that any pursuit of legal reform must proceed through Malaysia’s established constitutional mechanisms. He characterized the Federal Constitution as a hybrid system designed to accommodate civil law, Islamic law, and indigenous customary laws, reflecting the country’s unique realities since Independence.

Sardar Jagir Singh, deputy president of the Malaysian Consultative Council of Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Sikhism and Taoism, warned that placing Islam above the Federal Constitution would undermine the founding principles of Malaysia and threaten national unity. He highlighted that the Constitution was a product of key compromises among diverse communities represented by Umno, MCA, and MIC and stressed that Hadi’s assertion contradicts the nation’s constitutional foundation.

The responses underline the sensitivity surrounding constitutional and legal reforms in Malaysia, where efforts to expand syariah law must be balanced against a pluralistic legal framework and the country’s secular constitutional identity.

This article was reported by synthesizing coverage from multiple independent news outlets to present a balanced, unbiased account. Read about our editorial standards. Spotted an error? Let us know.