Siyasah Syar'iyyah and Islamic Constitutionalism in South-east Asia

Abstract

This study examines the manifestation of siyasah syar'iyyah (Islamic constitutional politics) within the constitutional frameworks of three Muslim-majority states in Southeast Asia, namely Indonesia, Malaysia, and Brunei Darussalam. Employing a comparative legal research design with normative, historical, and doctrinal approaches, the study analyzes the constitutional provisions governing Islam and state governance, the architecture of Islamic judicial institutions, the mechanisms of legislative consultation (shura), and the treatment of non-Muslim minority rights in each jurisdiction. The findings reveal three distinct constitutional models. Indonesia adopts a Pancasila-based pluralist model in which siyasah syar'iyyah principles are selectively integrated through Islamic personal law jurisdiction and regional autonomy. Malaysia operates a dual legal system in which Article 3(1) of the Federal Constitution declares Islam as the religion of the Federation, creating a constitutional framework of structured Islamic legal pluralism. Brunei Darussalam operationalizes siyasah syar'iyyah most comprehensively through the Melayu Islam Beraja (MIB) ideology and an absolute Islamic monarchy that integrates Malay identity, Islamic values, and monarchical authority into a single state philosophy. The comparative analysis demonstrates that despite their doctrinal divergence, all three states draw selectively on siyasah syar'iyyah principles, particularly maslahah (public interest), shura (consultation), and 'adl (justice), while adapting these principles to distinct historical, demographic, and political contexts. The study contributes to the comparative Islamic constitutional law literature and offers normative recommendations for the progressive harmonization of siyasah syar'iyyah principles with contemporary human rights standards across Southeast Asian jurisdictions.