KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — Lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla has filed a lawsuit against the Malaysian government, as he wants the Bahasa Malaysia translation of the Federal Constitution to be the authoritative text or to override the original text which is in English.
In his court challenge filed last night at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur, Haniff is seeking two main court orders.
He wants the court to declare that the Federal Constitution’s text in the national language is the authoritative text under Article 160B, and that this national language text would prevail over the text in the English language, if there are any conflicts or discrepancies between the two texts.
Alternatively, he wants the court to order the Malaysian government to take all necessary steps to ensure that the national language text of the Federal Constitution is prescribed to be the authoritative text within five years from the court order.
The Federal Constitution’s Article 160B states that when the Constitution has been translated into the national language, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong “may prescribe” the national language text to be authoritative, and that it would then prevail over the English language text if there are any conflicts or discrepancies.
In his lawsuit, Haniff argued that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s 2003 “launch” of the BM translation of the Federal Constitution would amount to “prescribing” it as the authoritative text.
This is not the first time that Haniff has raised this argument in the courts to claim that the BM text is the authoritative version, as he has previously raised it on behalf of Islamic religious bodies to argue that unilateral religious conversions of children are valid.
Previously, the Federal Court had in 2018 unanimously decided in Hindu mother M. Indira Gandhi’s case that the Federal Constitution’s English text is authoritative as there is no evidence that the BM text has been prescribed to be authoritative.
The Federal Court in 2024 had also unanimously in Hindu mother Loh Siew Hong’s case ruled that the Federal Constitution’s English text is the authoritative text and held that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong had not prescribed the BM translation to be authoritative.
The Federal Constitution was drafted in the English language and it has been the authoritative text in Malaysia since 1963, while the BM translation was reportedly launched in 2003.
The latest reprint as of 2020 of the Federal Constitution’s BM translation carries this note: “Teks ini HANYALAH TERJEMAHAN oleh Jabatan Peguam Negara bagi Federal Constitution. Melainkan jika dan sehingga ditetapkan sahih di bawah Perkara 160B Perlembagaan Persekutuan, teks ini bukan perundangan”.
In English, the note means: “This text is ONLY A TRANSLATION by the Attorney General’s Chambers for the Federal Constitution. Unless and until prescribed as authoritative under Article 160B of the Federal Constitution, this text is not law.”
In 2023, then attorney general Tan Sri Idrus Harun announced plans to propose for the Federal Constitution’s BM text to be the authoritative text under Article 160B, and said this plan would be subject to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s approval.
In a press statement this afternoon, Haniff said his lawsuit has been scheduled for case management this Friday.
