From the past to the present: the enduring impact of Hukum Kanun Pahang (Pahang Laws) in Malaysian society

The analysis of the legislative history of Malaya has significance as it allows for a more comprehensive examination of the underlying principles and objectives of certain provisions. A comprehensive understanding of laws necessitates the inclusion of historical context, as well as an examination of their primary qualities and origins. It is evident that some elements, including Islam, the monarchy, and the distinctive status of the Malays and the Malay language, had already been established before the British colonization. Hence, it is imperative to examine the legal status preceding and during the British colonization of Malaya, as it exerted a significant impact and was duly considered in the formulation of the Federal Constitution, as evident in the Johor State and the Terengganu State constitutions. This is particularly relevant concerning the Malay Sultanate, Islam, the Malays, and the Malay language (Muslim, 2020a). In contemporary Malaysia, the practice of Islamic law predates the establishment of the Melaka Laws, which were drafted during the reign of Sultan Muzaffar Shah (1446–1456) by Hang Sidi Ahmad (Wan Husein et al., 2018). Evidence of the early implementation of Islamic law may be found in the Terengganu Inscription, dated 14 Rajab 702H, equal to 22 February 1303 (Kamaruzaman et al., 2016; Uthman, 2012; Uthman and Hashim, 2010). The Terengganu inscription encompasses a range of legislation about crimes, transactions, and administrative matters (Hooker, 1976). During the reign of Sultan Abdul Ghafur Mahaiyuddin Shah (1592–1614), the Pahang Laws were implemented, followed by the Kedah Law (Harbour Law 1650), Tembera Dato’ Seri Paduka Tuan (1078H/1666M), Code of Law Dato’ Star (t.t), the Kedah Law (1199H/1784M), and the Perak Ninety-Nine Laws. These laws, which were introduced in Malaya, demonstrate a focus on Islamic law during that period. This demonstrates that the Malay community has used Syarak law in addressing concerns about religion, inheritance, marriage, and local affairs (Macken, 1969). However, it is important to note that the law of that era cannot be directly compared to the principles of contemporary law since the societal values and framework of that period differed significantly from the present circumstances. This is because Malaysia’s modern law governs civil, criminal, commercial, and constitutional matters, while traditional law governs communal life in Indigenous communities, including land tenure, inheritance, marriage, and social customs. The inception of Islamic-influenced legislation in Malaya may be traced back to the Melaka legislation. The existence of a legal system rooted in Islam in this nation before the arrival of European forces in Malaya is substantiated by historical sources such as the Melaka and Pahang Laws (Muslim, 2020b). For example, the two written laws during the Malacca Sultanate were the Malacca Laws and the Strait of Malacca Laws. While the Strait of Malacca Laws define maritime traffic and trade regulations, the Malacca Laws outline the authority of the king and ministers as well as taboos and punishments (Mustafa@Busul, ‘Ain Mohd Firdaus Kozaku, 2019). In essence, the nature and substance of laws are contingent upon or subject to the exigencies of the prevailing era. Therefore, the Melaka Laws and The Pahang Laws must not be assessed using the existing perspectives or standards. This observation indicates that the British did not introduce vitality or the legal framework to this nation (Muslim, 2020b). The Johor State Constitution, established in 1895, has the distinction of being the oldest written Constitution in Malaya during the modern era. According to the constitutional provisions, it is stipulated that the monarch must possess certain qualifications, including being of Malay ethnicity, having royal lineage tracing back to the Johor Kings, being male, and adhering to the Islamic faith. In addition, it is required that the ministers possess Malay ethnicity, be affiliated with the Sultan, and adhere to the Islamic faith. According to Point VII, the designated state religion for the region of Johor is Islam. The perpetual establishment of Johor as the official religion is essential. According to Article VII of the Constitution, it is stipulated that: >…what is called the State Religion for this region and the state of Johor is Islam, and that being the case, Islam must continuously and forever be and be recognized and spoken as the state religion, that is, any other religion must never-times made or pronounced as the state religion, even though all other religions are allowed and always understood as should be allowed to be practised peacefully and peacefully by the people who adhere to it in every part and region and subjugated colony within the state of Johor. Subsequently, in the year 1911, the Laws of Constitution of Terengganu were established, stipulating that the monarch governing Terengganu must consistently adhere to the Islamic faith, possess Malay ethnicity, and trace their genealogy back to the Sultans of Terengganu. Under the regulations, it is required that the ministers possess both the religious affiliation of Islam and have citizenship in the state of Terengganu. In Chapter 51, it was observed that Islam has the status of being the official religion of the state. After the British colonization of Malaya, English law became more significant, displacing preexisting laws and constitutions. The British administration aimed to establish a uniform legal system across the Malay States, centralizing legal authority and creating a unified framework. They introduced reforms, codified laws, established courts, and implemented new procedures, which continue to influence the legal landscape in modern Malaysia (Muslim, 2020c). The British implemented a series of legal reforms in Penang, first with the introduction of the Charter of Justice in 1807. This was then followed by the implementation of the Second Charter of Justice in 1826 and, finally, the Third Charter of Justice in 1855. The introduction of these charters has resulted in the relegation of Islamic law from its prior status as a locally practised legal system, leading to a significant decline in its overall authority. The British government formally established a distinct legal framework for Islamic law by the implementation of the Islamic Marriage Ordinance in 1880. This legislation effectively delineated the scope of Islamic law by confining its jurisdiction only to matters of divorce and marriage. The exclusion of Islamic law extends beyond marital affairs and encompasses the establishment of distinct legislation governing the application of Islamic law, so limiting the authority of Islamic judicial institutions, among other measures. One of the first administrative regulations in Islamic law that emerged under British influence was the Order in Council 1880. This regulation was established to govern the collection of zakat for the state of Perak. Subsequently, the Registration of Muhammadan Marriages and Divorce 1885 was introduced, which specifically addresses matters related to divorce (Muslim, 2014a). The legal system in Malaya is closely intertwined with the Institutions of the Malay Sultanate since the latter significantly contribute to the development and implementation of laws in the region. To enhance comprehension, it is apparent that the position of the Sultan has a prominent position inside the first section of any extant legislation. The Malay Sultanate is the most traditional institution, having long been an integral part of the social order in the Malay nations for several centuries. It has played a direct role in the government of Malaya. The etymology of the term ‘Kerajaan’ in Malay is often attributed to its derivation from the word ‘raja.’ The tight association between the words ‘king’ and ‘kingdom’ is evident, as shown by their use as designations for the head of state in Malaysia and the nine states adhering to the monarchy system. Following the monarchical framework, the king had authority over all aspects of governance and state administration, relying on appointed British officials as key facilitators, particularly before the advent of British colonization. Before the outbreak of the Second World War, the Sultans, although being subject to British colonial governance, had autonomous authority and wielded complete sovereignty inside their territories. Nevertheless, concurrently, some agreements made with the British obliged the Sultan to seek counsel from British officials designated as British Residents or Advisors, except for matters about the Islamic faith and Malay traditions (Bari, 1999). The aforementioned circumstance persisted until the establishment of the Malayan Union in 1946, during which the Sultan's authority was limited to matters about Malay traditions, while the Governor assumed control over the Islamic faith and the administrative power of the state. The dissolution of the Malayan Union Constitution and the subsequent establishment of the Federation of Malaya in 1948 might be attributed to the resistance expressed by the Malays. The restoration of the Sultan's rights was facilitated by the implementation of the new constitution. Individuals are granted the entitlement to be informed about things in the legislative process via the implementation of a Constitutional Monarchy framework (Muslim, 2018). Malaysia is a nation that continues to adhere to the constitutional monarchy system. The enduring presence of the political system is a testament to its historical heritage. The Malay Sultanate in Malaysia is an enduring institution that serves as the central authority in the government and administration of a Malay kingdom, having developed over many centuries (Bari, 2002).

This present piece of writing can be categorized as a theoretical article. Therefore, a thorough literature review was conducted, encompassing scholarly articles, books, governmental reports, policy documents, legal reports, and other relevant materials about the legislative framework of Pahang Laws in Malaysia. Interestingly, this study does not explicitly evaluate the main source, specifically the Hukum Kanun Pahang, but instead examines research related to the Pahang Law to analyse the discussions displayed in it. The study identified a clear background of Pahang Laws and several elements within this legislation by conducting a comprehensive literature analysis from multiple sources. The finding also assessed the legal system's impact on the Malay sultanate, specifically through the Pahang Laws. This overview of Pahang Laws offers a comprehensive grasp of the legal system in Malaysia. This outcome demonstrates the recognition and endeavours of the Malay Sultanate to protect justice within an Islamic-based administration by emphasizing that the highest achievement of Malay culture lies in the legal framework.

- The Pahang Laws (circa 1595–1596) are among the earliest comprehensive legal codes in Malaya after the Melaka Laws, exhibiting stronger incorporation of Islamic (Shariah) principles and a reduction of purely customary elements. - The code underwent up to three amendments: clauses 1–23 (original), 24–66 (influenced by Islamic principles, especially Shafi‘i jurisprudence), and 67–93 (reflecting Johor and Melaka legal influences); clause 23 records a date of September 25, 1595. - The Pahang Laws articulate a structured governance model centered on the Sultan as khalifa responsible for enjoining good and forbidding evil, supported by officials such as the Bendahari (Treasurer), Temenggung (domestic administration/police), Hulubalang, and Syahbandar (trade/ports). - Substantive scope spans multiple branches: Criminal, Civil/Muamalat, Procedure and Evidence, Religious, International, Taxation, and Maritime/Trade (drawing on the Melaka Maritime Code). Detailed clause coverage includes: • Criminal matters (e.g., murder, theft, robbery, trespass, adultery/rape, gambling, corruption): clauses 4–8, 22, 46–59, 63, 70, 72, 74, 79, 84, 86, 90, 92–93. • Muamalat (transactions: sale, lease, mortgage, borrowing, debt, wages): clauses 2–3, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16–18, 24–39, 41–44, 62, 77, 81, 85, 87–88. • Religious offenses: clauses 60–61, 64–65. • Custom and government (duties/privileges of kings and dignitaries): clauses 1, 12, 20–21, 23, 56–57, 75–76, 82–83, 89, 91. - Symbolic and regulatory provisions reinforce royal authority and social hierarchy (e.g., prohibitions on wearing yellow or specific regalia without commendation, with sanctions up to capital punishment), underscoring constitutional customs and rule of law under the Sultan. - Historical and constitutional continuity: Elements of the Pahang Laws’ sultan-centered governance and Islamic legal orientation echo in later state constitutions (Johor 1895; Terengganu 1911) and the modern Malaysian constitutional monarchy, where the Sultan/Agong retains roles in religion, Malay customs, and key appointments. - Despite British legal reforms (Charters of Justice 1807/1826/1855; Islamic Marriage Ordinance 1880; Registration of Muhammadan Marriages and Divorce 1885) that confined Islamic law largely to personal matters, the Sultan’s authority over religion and custom endured, reflecting the resilience of Malay-Islamic legal institutions. - Governance ethos emphasizes cooperation between the Sultan and Pembesar (nobles/officials) as essential for peace and effective administration, anticipating modern principles of checks and balances and collaborative state functioning.

The study set out to examine how the Hukum Kanun Pahang shaped justice and governance in Malaysia’s socio-legal system and to assess its enduring impact within the Malay Sultanate institution. By synthesizing historical legal texts and scholarship, the findings demonstrate that the Pahang Laws codified an Islamic-influenced constitutional order centered on the Sultan as a just ruler (khalifa), supported by defined offices and procedures across criminal, civil (muamalat), religious, evidentiary, international, tax, and maritime domains. This comprehensive scope indicates a sophisticated pre-colonial legal framework capable of organizing state administration, regulating commerce and maritime activities, and enforcing public morality and social hierarchy. The identification of successive amendments and clause groupings reveals an evolving legal corpus responsive to Islamic jurisprudence (Shafi‘i) and regional legal interactions (Melaka/Johor), addressing the research question about the Pahang Laws’ nature and breadth. The persistence of royal-religious authority through colonial transitions, and its reflection in later state constitutions and the current Federal framework, underscores the Pahang Laws’ role in institutional continuity. This continuity helps explain the modern constitutional monarchy’s distribution of powers—particularly in religion, custom, and appointments—and illustrates how Islamic legal principles and Malay customs remained embedded despite British legal centralization. The implications for the field are twofold: (1) historically, the Pahang Laws contest narratives that modern legal order arrived solely through colonial influence by evidencing an indigenous, Islamic-based legal sophistication; and (2) comparatively, they provide a model for societies with similar demographics and cultures in Southeast Asia seeking to integrate religious principles with constitutional governance and rule of law. The emphasis on cooperation between sovereign and officials offers a normative template for stability, checks and balances, and public welfare in contemporary governance.

In conclusion, the Institution of the Malay Sultanate plays a crucial role in upholding justice and fostering unity within Malaysia. The Yang di Pertuan Agong's solemn pledge to administer the government equitably while following the laws, Constitution, and Islamic values serves as a poignant reminder of these ideals' significance in the nation's administration. The Pahang Laws highlight the sultan's responsibility to safeguard and promote the welfare of all individuals, underscoring the interconnectedness between the monarch and state officials. This underscores the significance of cooperation in attaining the shared objective of effective government. The legal system in Malaya reflects the Malay Sultanate's recognition of the significance of justice and Islamic principles in the nation's governance, symbolizing the apex of Malay culture. The Institution of the Malay Sultanate is widely regarded as a significant emblem of cohesion, equity, and effective administration. Its enduring existence is a poignant testament to the nation's profound historical legacy and cultural patrimony.

- The study is theoretical and relies on secondary sources (scholarly works, reports, legal documents) rather than direct, critical examination of the primary Hukum Kanun Pahang manuscript. - Absence of empirical or quantitative analysis; findings are interpretive and historiographical, which may limit generalizability and the ability to test causal claims. - Focus on Malaysian context and Malay Sultanate institutions may limit applicability to different legal-cultural settings without careful comparative adaptation.