ISSN: 2222-6990
Open access
Human rights activists demanded a stringent action from the Executive due to an annual occurrence of river pollution and a recurring haze disaster in 2019. The proposed move includes removal of the respective Environment Minister and an emergency declaration by the King (YDPA) to address the above situations. It is under this premise that the Lockean legalism model is explored in relation to the emergency power conferred to the Executive i.e., the Monarch. Modelling John Locke’s legalism, namely conditions of political legitimacy meaningfully describe legitimate sovereign approach to laws that are conducive to public good. The primary aim of the research is to legally explore the adoption of Lockean legalism in examining the extent of the powers conferred to the YDPA and the enumerated function of the Conference of Rulers in the proclamation of emergency in the environment and climate change domain in Malaysia. The research employs a qualitative methodology and incorporates a content analysis approach. The outcome of this study is a proposed measure using the Lockean mechanism in understanding the power to proclaim emergency in the environmental crisis. This research is significant as it would contribute to the body of knowledge to enhance the prerogative power of the YDPA in relation to the state of emergency.
Annuar, A. (2019). Putrajaya not declaring emergency over Pasir Gudang toxic fumes. [online] Available. The Malay Mail.
https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/2019/03/14/putrajaya-not-declaring-emergency-over-pasir-gudang-toxic-fumes/1732660
Arnold, K. (2005). Domestic War: Locke's Concept of Prerogative and Implications for U.S.
'Wars' Today. Polity, 1-28.
Bossuet, J. B. (1707). Bossuet: Politics Drawn from the Very Words of Holy Scripture. In
Riley, P. (1990). Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Bulmer, E. (2017). Constitutional Monarchs in Parliamentary Democracies. International
Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA). https://www.idea.int/sites/default/files/publications/constitutional-monarchs-in-parliamentary-democracies-primer.pdf.
Carvalho, M., Sivanandam, H., & Rahim, R. (2019). Dewan Rakyat approves motion to declare state of emergency over Pasir Gudang chemical dump. The Star. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2019/03/14/dewan-rakyat-approves-motion-to-declare-state-of-emergency-over-pasir-gudang-chemical-spill/.
Carvalho, M., Sivanandam, H., & Rahim, R. (2020). Dewan Rakyat passes amendments to National Security Council Act 2016, removing PM's power to declare security zone. The Star. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2020/08/24/dewan-rakyat-passes-amendments-to-national-security-council-act-2016-removing-pm039s-power-to-declare-security-zone.
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim v Government of Malaysia & Anor. 4.M.L.J.133. (2020).
Drahos, P. (2004). The Regulation of Public Goods. Journal of International Economic Law,
7(2), 321-339.
Devi, V. (2019). Sg Kim Kim victims file RM30mil suit against Federal, state
governments and 10 others. The Star.
Dzulkifli, F., & Zameri, M. N. (2016). e Functions of Constitutional Monarchy in Malaysian Political System: The Perceptions of Malay Community. Seminar on National Resilience. Political Managements and Policies in Malaysia. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/12118572.pdf
Faruqi, S. S. (2013). Emergency Powers of the Monarch. The Malaysian Bar. https://www.malaysianbar.org.my/article/news/legal-and-general-news/legal-news/emergency-powers-of-the-monarch.
Faruqi, S. S. (2016). Controversy surrounding NSC Act: Despite his general duty to act on advice, the King retains some discretionary powers. The Star. https://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/columnists/reflecting-on-the-law/2016/09/01/controversy-surrounding-nsc-act-despite-his-general-duty-to-act-on-advice-the-king-retains-some-disc/
Fernando, J. M. (2014). Defending the monarchy: The Malay rulers and the making of the
Malayan constitution, 1956-1957. Varia, 88, 149-167.
Jenkins, D. (2011). The Lockean Constitution: Separation of Powers and the Limits of
Prerogative, 56 (3). McGill 543. https://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1005132ar.
Hickling, R. H. (1975). The Prerogative in Malaysia. Malaya Law Review, 17(2), 207-232.
Lloyd, S. (1992). Hobbes's absolutism. In Ideals as Interests in Hobbes's Leviathan: The
Power of Mind over Matter, 289-321. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Locke, J. (1988). Two Treatises of Government. In P. Laslett (Ed.), Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought (pp. 265-428). Cambridge University Press.
Montesquieu: The Spirit of the Laws. (1989). In A. Cohler, B. Miller, & H. Stone (Eds.), Cambridge Texts in the History of Political Thought. Cambridge University Press.
Madhavan Nair v Government of Malaysia, 2.M.L.J.286. (1975).
Pasquino, P. (1998). Locke on King’s Prerogative, Pol. Theory, 26, 198–208.
Perumal, P. (2020). King may refer constitutionality question to Federal Court.
The Malay Mail.
Phang Chin Hock v Public Prosecutor, 2.M.L.J.213.(1980).
Public Prosecutor v Mohd Amin bin Mohd Razali & Ors, 5.M.L.J.406. (2002).
Saraf, M., Mohd, T., Nordin, S., & Abdullah, M. (2019). The Applicability of Land Allocation Approach For Post-Disaster House Construction in Kuala Krai. Planning Malaysia: Journal of the Malaysian Institute of Planners, 17(1), 205-218. https://www.planningmalaysia.org/index.php/pmj/article/view/599
Sharon, A. (2019). Locke, liberty, and law: Legalism and extra-legal powers in the Second
Treatise. European Journal of Political Theory.
Smith, S. (1995). British Relations with the Malay Rulers from Decentralization to Malayan Independence 1930-1957. Oxford University Press.
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Abang Openg and Tawi Sli, 2.M.L.J. 238. (1968).
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malacca, 1.M.L.J.119. (1968).
Teh Cheng Poh v Public Prosecutor, 1.M.L.J.50. (1979).
The New Straits Times. (2019). Malaysian’s Monarchy: One of Worlds’ Oldest.
The New Straits Times.
History Behind the Malaysian Monarchy. (2010). The Star. https://www.thestar.com.my/news/nation/2010/06/05/history-behind-the-malaysian-monarchy
Tushnet, M. (2005). Emergencies and the Idea of Constitutionalism, 50. In Tushnet, M.
(2005). The Constitution in Wartime. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Vern, W. T. T. (2019). Subversion and Emergency Powers. Malayan Legal Journal, 4, lxxiii,
lxxiv-lxiv.
Winstedt, R. (1968). A History of Malaya, 224-240. Kuala Lumpur: Marican & Sons Ltd.
Zubir, S., & Amirrol, H. (2011). Disaster risk reduction through community participation. WIT Transactions on Ecology and the Environment, 195-205.
In-Text Citation: (Mangsor et al., 2021)
To Cite this Article: Mangsor, M. M., Aziz, N. A., Rahmat, N. E., & Zainudin, A. H. (2021). Modelling Lockean Legalism in the Executive Emergency Power on Environment and Climate Change Domain in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(5), 774–784.
Copyright: © 2021 The Author(s)
Published by HRMARS (www.hrmars.com)
This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this license may be seen at: http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode