Universiti Teknologi MARA and Constitutional Idolatry

Abstract

University Teknologi MARA (UiTM) exists as a statutory body by virtue of an Act of Parliament (Act 173) and it is regarded as a special instrument to further the objectives of the quota provision under Article 153 of the Federal Constitution. Unfortunately, an examination of its policies would reveal severe inconsistencies and contradictions with the law. However, this state of affairs is a perfect example of the “living law” as opposed to “constitutional idolatry” in which the real workings and understanding of the Constitution do not always align perfectly with the content of the Constitution. This paper proposes to explore these legal issues, using the legal doctrinal and theoretical analysis as its research method. An examination of the UiTM controversy by this paper would demonstrate the influence and effects of sociolegal jurisprudence and postmodern jurisprudence. In sociolegal jurisprudence, law must also be examined from the actions of individuals and institutions, while in postmodern jurisprudence, it denies the impartiality of “law” and it also exposes the reasons for any kinds of legal comprehension. Hence this paper would prove that merely applying legality based on the law is an inadequate analysis and response to the legal and constitutional problems surrounding UiTM.