CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
:
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia [1968] 1 MLJ 119, Federal Court, Kuala Lumpur
Keywords: Stephen Kalong Ningkan, Sarawak, Chief Minister, dismissal, constitutional law, amendment
Title: Stephen Kalong Ningkan: The Rise and Fall of Sarawak's First Chief Minister
Body:
Stephen Kalong Ningkan was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to lead his people to independence. In 1963, when he was just 38 years old, Ningkan became the first Chief Minister of Sarawak.
Ningkan was a popular leader. He was seen as a champion of the people, and he worked hard to improve the lives of Sarawakians. However, he also made enemies. Some of the most powerful people in Sarawak were opposed to his policies, and they wanted to remove him from power.
In 1966, Ningkan was dismissed from office by the Governor of Sarawak. The Governor claimed that Ningkan had lost the confidence of the Assembly, but Ningkan and his supporters accused the Governor of being a puppet of the federal government.
Ningkan challenged his dismissal in court, but the Federal Court ruled in favor of the Governor. Ningkan was forced to step down as Chief Minister, and he was replaced by a man who was more amenable to the federal government's wishes.
Ningkan's dismissal was a major setback for Sarawak's independence movement. It showed that the federal government was not willing to allow Sarawak to become truly independent. However, Ningkan's legacy lives on. He is remembered as a champion of the people, and he is still respected by many Sarawakians.
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia [1968] 2 MLJ 238, Privy Council Appeal from Malaysia
Keywords: Stephen Kalong Ningkan, Sarawak, Chief Minister, dismissal, constitutional law, amendment, Privy Council
Title: Stephen Kalong Ningkan: The Battle for Sarawak's Independence
Body:
Stephen Kalong Ningkan was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to lead his people to independence. In 1963, when he was just 38 years old, Ningkan became the first Chief Minister of Sarawak.
Ningkan was a popular leader. He was seen as a champion of the people, and he worked hard to improve the lives of Sarawakians. However, he also made enemies. Some of the most powerful people in Sarawak were opposed to his policies, and they wanted to remove him from power.
In 1966, Ningkan was dismissed from office by the Governor of Sarawak. The Governor claimed that Ningkan had lost the confidence of the Assembly, but Ningkan and his supporters accused the Governor of being a puppet of the federal government.
Ningkan challenged his dismissal in court, but the Federal Court ruled in favor of the Governor. Ningkan was forced to step down as Chief Minister, and he was replaced by a man who was more amenable to the federal government's wishes.
Ningkan appealed the decision of the Federal Court to the Privy Council, which was then the highest court in the British Empire. The Privy Council overturned the decision of the Federal Court and reinstated Ningkan as Chief Minister.
The decision of the Privy Council was a major victory for Ningkan and for Sarawak's independence movement. It showed that the federal government could not simply dismiss a Chief Minister who was not to its liking. The decision also helped to strengthen Sarawak's position in the federation of Malaysia.
:
Teo Soh Lung v Minister Of Home Affairs & Ors (No 2) [1988] 3 MLJ 241, High Court, Singapore
Keywords: Teo Soh Lung, Singapore, Internal Security Act, habeas corpus, constitutional law, amendment
Title: Teo Soh Lung: The Battle for Freedom of Speech
Body:
Teo Soh Lung was a young woman with a big dream. She wanted to fight for freedom of speech in Singapore. In 1987, when she was just 26 years old, Teo was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA). The ISA is a draconian law that allows the government to detain people without trial.
Teo was arrested for writing articles that were critical of the government. She was held in detention for two years, during which time she was not allowed to see her family or friends.
After her release from detention, Teo continued to fight for freedom of speech. She wrote articles, gave speeches, and organized protests. She also challenged the constitutionality of the ISA in court.
In 1988, Teo's case went to the High Court of Singapore. The High Court ruled that the ISA was constitutional. However, the Court also ruled that the government could not detain someone under the ISA for writing articles that were critical of the government.
Teo's case was a major victory for freedom of speech in Singapore. It showed that the government could not simply detain people who were critical of the government. The case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of speech in Singapore.
Teo Soh Lung v Minister of Home Affairs & Ors [1990] 2 MLJ 129, Court of Appeal, Singapore
Keywords: Teo Soh Lung, Singapore, Internal Security Act, habeas corpus, constitutional law, amendment, basic features doctrine
Title: Teo Soh Lung: The Final Battle for Freedom of Speech
Body:
Teo Soh Lung's case was not over yet. The government appealed the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the government. The Court of Appeal held that the ISA was constitutional and that the government could detain someone under the ISA for writing articles that were critical of the government.
Teo's case was a major setback for freedom of speech in Singapore. It showed that the government was not willing to allow freedom of speech to be unlimited. However, Teo's case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of speech in Singapore.
Loh Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia [1977] 2 MLJ 187, Federal Court, Kuala Lumpur
Keywords: Loh Kooi Choon, Malaysia, constitutional law, amendment, basic features doctrine
Title: Loh Kooi Choon: The Case That Established the Basic Features Doctrine
Body:
Loh Kooi Choon was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to fight for democracy in Malaysia. In 1974, when he was just 26 years old, Loh was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA). The ISA is a draconian law that allows the government to detain people without trial.
Loh was arrested for organizing protests against the government. He was held in detention for two years, during which time he was not allowed to see his family or friends.
After his release from detention, Loh continued to fight for democracy in Malaysia. He wrote articles, gave speeches, and organized protests. He also challenged the constitutionality of the ISA in court.
In 1977, Loh's case went to the Federal Court of Malaysia. The Federal Court ruled that the ISA was constitutional. However, the Court also ruled that the government could not detain someone under the ISA for organizing protests against the government.
Loh's case was a major victory for democracy in Malaysia. It showed that the government could not simply detain people who were critical of the government. The case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of democracy in Malaysia.
The Loh Kooi Choon case also established the basic features doctrine in Malaysian constitutional law. The basic features doctrine holds that there are certain features of the Malaysian constitution that cannot be amended. These features include the sovereignty of the Malay rulers, the special position of the Malays, and the Islamic religion.
The basic features doctrine has been used to strike down several amendments to the Malaysian constitution. It has also been used to challenge the constitutionality of several government policies. The basic features doctrine has become an important tool for protecting the fundamental rights of Malaysian citizens.
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia [1968] 1 MLJ 119, Federal Court, Kuala Lumpur
Keywords: Stephen Kalong Ningkan, Sarawak, Chief Minister, dismissal, constitutional law, amendment
Title: Stephen Kalong Ningkan: The Rise and Fall of Sarawak's First Chief Minister
Body:
Stephen Kalong Ningkan was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to lead his people to independence. In 1963, when he was just 38 years old, Ningkan became the first Chief Minister of Sarawak.
Ningkan was a popular leader. He was seen as a champion of the people, and he worked hard to improve the lives of Sarawakians. However, he also made enemies. Some of the most powerful people in Sarawak were opposed to his policies, and they wanted to remove him from power.
In 1966, Ningkan was dismissed from office by the Governor of Sarawak. The Governor claimed that Ningkan had lost the confidence of the Assembly, but Ningkan and his supporters accused the Governor of being a puppet of the federal government.
Ningkan challenged his dismissal in court, but the Federal Court ruled in favor of the Governor. Ningkan was forced to step down as Chief Minister, and he was replaced by a man who was more amenable to the federal government's wishes.
Ningkan's dismissal was a major setback for Sarawak's independence movement. It showed that the federal government was not willing to allow Sarawak to become truly independent. However, Ningkan's legacy lives on. He is remembered as a champion of the people, and he is still respected by many Sarawakians.
Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Government of Malaysia [1968] 2 MLJ 238, Privy Council Appeal from Malaysia
Keywords: Stephen Kalong Ningkan, Sarawak, Chief Minister, dismissal, constitutional law, amendment, Privy Council
Title: Stephen Kalong Ningkan: The Battle for Sarawak's Independence
Body:
Stephen Kalong Ningkan was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to lead his people to independence. In 1963, when he was just 38 years old, Ningkan became the first Chief Minister of Sarawak.
Ningkan was a popular leader. He was seen as a champion of the people, and he worked hard to improve the lives of Sarawakians. However, he also made enemies. Some of the most powerful people in Sarawak were opposed to his policies, and they wanted to remove him from power.
In 1966, Ningkan was dismissed from office by the Governor of Sarawak. The Governor claimed that Ningkan had lost the confidence of the Assembly, but Ningkan and his supporters accused the Governor of being a puppet of the federal government.
Ningkan challenged his dismissal in court, but the Federal Court ruled in favor of the Governor. Ningkan was forced to step down as Chief Minister, and he was replaced by a man who was more amenable to the federal government's wishes.
Ningkan appealed the decision of the Federal Court to the Privy Council, which was then the highest court in the British Empire. The Privy Council overturned the decision of the Federal Court and reinstated Ningkan as Chief Minister.
The decision of the Privy Council was a major victory for Ningkan and for Sarawak's independence movement. It showed that the federal government could not simply dismiss a Chief Minister who was not to its liking. The decision also helped to strengthen Sarawak's position in the federation of Malaysia.
:
Teo Soh Lung v Minister Of Home Affairs & Ors (No 2) [1988] 3 MLJ 241, High Court, Singapore
Keywords: Teo Soh Lung, Singapore, Internal Security Act, habeas corpus, constitutional law, amendment
Title: Teo Soh Lung: The Battle for Freedom of Speech
Body:
Teo Soh Lung was a young woman with a big dream. She wanted to fight for freedom of speech in Singapore. In 1987, when she was just 26 years old, Teo was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA). The ISA is a draconian law that allows the government to detain people without trial.
Teo was arrested for writing articles that were critical of the government. She was held in detention for two years, during which time she was not allowed to see her family or friends.
After her release from detention, Teo continued to fight for freedom of speech. She wrote articles, gave speeches, and organized protests. She also challenged the constitutionality of the ISA in court.
In 1988, Teo's case went to the High Court of Singapore. The High Court ruled that the ISA was constitutional. However, the Court also ruled that the government could not detain someone under the ISA for writing articles that were critical of the government.
Teo's case was a major victory for freedom of speech in Singapore. It showed that the government could not simply detain people who were critical of the government. The case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of speech in Singapore.
Teo Soh Lung v Minister of Home Affairs & Ors [1990] 2 MLJ 129, Court of Appeal, Singapore
Keywords: Teo Soh Lung, Singapore, Internal Security Act, habeas corpus, constitutional law, amendment, basic features doctrine
Title: Teo Soh Lung: The Final Battle for Freedom of Speech
Body:
Teo Soh Lung's case was not over yet. The government appealed the decision of the High Court to the Court of Appeal. The Court of Appeal ruled in favor of the government. The Court of Appeal held that the ISA was constitutional and that the government could detain someone under the ISA for writing articles that were critical of the government.
Teo's case was a major setback for freedom of speech in Singapore. It showed that the government was not willing to allow freedom of speech to be unlimited. However, Teo's case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of freedom of speech in Singapore.
Loh Kooi Choon v Government of Malaysia [1977] 2 MLJ 187, Federal Court, Kuala Lumpur
Keywords: Loh Kooi Choon, Malaysia, constitutional law, amendment, basic features doctrine
Title: Loh Kooi Choon: The Case That Established the Basic Features Doctrine
Body:
Loh Kooi Choon was a young man with a big dream. He wanted to fight for democracy in Malaysia. In 1974, when he was just 26 years old, Loh was arrested under the Internal Security Act (ISA). The ISA is a draconian law that allows the government to detain people without trial.
Loh was arrested for organizing protests against the government. He was held in detention for two years, during which time he was not allowed to see his family or friends.
After his release from detention, Loh continued to fight for democracy in Malaysia. He wrote articles, gave speeches, and organized protests. He also challenged the constitutionality of the ISA in court.
In 1977, Loh's case went to the Federal Court of Malaysia. The Federal Court ruled that the ISA was constitutional. However, the Court also ruled that the government could not detain someone under the ISA for organizing protests against the government.
Loh's case was a major victory for democracy in Malaysia. It showed that the government could not simply detain people who were critical of the government. The case also helped to raise awareness of the importance of democracy in Malaysia.
The Loh Kooi Choon case also established the basic features doctrine in Malaysian constitutional law. The basic features doctrine holds that there are certain features of the Malaysian constitution that cannot be amended. These features include the sovereignty of the Malay rulers, the special position of the Malays, and the Islamic religion.
The basic features doctrine has been used to strike down several amendments to the Malaysian constitution. It has also been used to challenge the constitutionality of several government policies. The basic features doctrine has become an important tool for protecting the fundamental rights of Malaysian citizens.
- THE MALAYSIAN e LAW ENCYCLOPEDIA
- ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
- AGENCY
- ANIMALS
- ARBITRATION
- ARMY CASES
- ARMS AND AMMUNITION
- AUCTIONS
- BAILMENT
- BANISHMENT
- BANKING
- BETTING AND GAMING
- BILLS OF SALE
- BURIALS
- CARRIAGE BY AIR AND LAND
- CHARITIES
- CHILDREN/YOUNG PERSONS
- CHINESE LAW AND CUSTOM
- CITIZENSHIP
- CIVIL LAW
- CIVIL LAW ACT
- CONFLICT OF LAWS
- CONSTITUTIONAL LAW
- CONTRACT
- COPYRIGHT
- COSTS
- CRIMINAL LAW
- CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
- CURRENCY
- CUSTOMS AND EXCISE
- DAMAGES - PERSONAL INJURY/DEATH
- DEBTORS
- DEFAMATION
- ELECTIONS
- EMERGENCY LAWS
