ژئوپلیتیک

Voting is one of the most significant ways for individuals to make a say in the government’s decision-making. A ballot is the bedrock to democracy which may be also argued as a formal expression of choice for a candidate or a proposed solution to an issue. The low turnout rate in the recent Malaysian by-election in Johor, Malacca and Sarawak as well as the 15th General Election (GE15) has led to the discussion on the rights to vote and not to vote. The primary issue to be addressed in this article is whether the right not to vote violates morality in the political context and whether or not such a right constitutes freedom of expression. Furthermore, the relationship between the state and the people will also be studied further in order to determine the responsibilities of the people. The primary objective of this article is to determine the relationship between low voter turnout rates from certain groups of communities and the validity of their decision to vote or not to vote in a legal and moral paradigm. The authors will collect data from primary and secondary sources such as books and journals related to the right to vote and not to vote in different political systems. The authors will also analyze data from books, journals, articles and more to make reasonable comparisons between the democratic system in Malaysia and in other countries that discuss the right not to vote. 

As a nation that operates under a democratic form of government, Malaysia is home to a diverse range of political beliefs, each of which is supported by a distinct political party. In addition to that, it is made up of citizens of multiple races, such as Malay, Indian, Chinese, and other races, each of whom unquestionably has their own opinion concerning a variety of different subjects. The disparities in political ideology and cultural upbringing that exist between different ethnic communities are an essential factor in the potential for racial tensions. The objective of this article is twofold: first, to examine how politicians in Malaysia obtain support from voters, either directly or indirectly, by utilising jurisprudence theory; and second, to analyze how politicians, by utilising their authority, attempt to govern people in a peaceful manner. While the study employs a doctrinal approach, the data were gathered through library research to learn how Malaysian politicians use their positions of authority to further their own agendas while attempting to uphold the stability of the nation and the well-being of the people. The analysis concluded that the study of jurisprudence, which encompasses both the theory and philosophy of law, has a significant bearing on Malaysia's political and legal institutions and the constitutional processes and justifications for those institutions. Although obtaining justice for all parties can be challenging, nations typically prefer to adopt decisions that prioritise protecting the general welfare over pursuing the goal of justice.

Historically, the United Nations Security Council has been the dominant international venue for discussing on matters relevant to the maintaining of global security and peace. The term “rule of law” refers to a political and social structure in which everyone is held to the same legal standards. On the other hand, the concept that everyone is equal before the law is undermined when the veto power gives the Permanent Members the opportunity to disregard its accountability. This article aims to overview the use of veto powers in the United Nations Security Council that reflects the Rule of Law. Due to the fact that this method of research is qualitative, the data that was gathered and analysed came from non-numerical sources such as journals, articles, and news reports. The goal is to gain a deeper understanding of the conventional notions of Rule of Law as well as the ways in which the veto system is in opposition to Rule of Law. According to the findings of the research, there is a contradiction between the veto system and the Rule of Law, notably the notion that all individuals ought to be treated with equal regard to the law.     

Natural law-based self-defense draws its moral force given that it is used in the presence of an immediate threat, giving the defender government no time for deliberation and placing them in a dreadful situation where they must choose between using force in self-defense or losing their lives. The self-defense right is an essential human right that has existed and been recognised throughout history. It is accessible to both individuals and, as states formed, to states as sovereign entities. Self-defense confines rather than widens the area for public officials' discretion, unlike other criminal justice systems that fulfil important political purposes. It rejects public interest and public justification in favour of private ones. The problem to be investigated in this article is the right of self-defense can still be imposed by the state at the same time preserving the natural law in the country.  This article will analyse the view of the right to self-defense and jurisprudential analysis of the right to self-defense. The study is qualitative doctrinal research that derives its data from library-based sources. The article suggests that the state has the power to suspend our right to self-defense but certainly not extinguish it. A state may take away this natural law because of the welfare and safety of society. However, when facing immediate threat, natural law will be preserved as the State can't guarantee our safety is imminent

The development of digital technology encourages the advantages of using digital media as the main information source. However, such development has also been misused by certain individuals or entities to mislead the public by generating fake news. On the Internet, false information travels faster than the truth, and it takes a lot of effort to stop it. This article uses a qualitative approach analysis to evaluate the various strategies used to thwart false news. In the first part, the authors described the notion of false news. In the second part, the authors examined the legislative framework that Malaysian parliaments have adopted to make it illegal to spread and publish false information. In the final part, the authors zoomed through the lens of jurisprudence that can be applied as a counter measure against dissemination of fake news. Hence, the importance of this article is to provide a clear understanding of the jurisprudence analysis of fake news in Malaysia.

The constant economic inflation worries our society, especially our government, as the citizens pressured them. Not to mention how the price influx in the market causes employers to find alternative routes to keep their business alive. Throughout the century, the effect of the free-market economy has been debated. Free market systems build on the principle of no intervention from the government. Will zero government help the market economy, and will the concept of freedom in the free market give justice to the employer and employee? Through doctrinal research, this paper aims to study the relationship between the free market and the employment contract based on social justice theory. As a result, this paper tracked down primary and secondary sources from journal archives and online databases related to employment contracts. International philosophers and judicial views also examined Malaysian legal perspectives on social justice and employment contracts. This paper uses empirical research to discuss the effects of the market system on social justice in employment contracts. The main findings are the following: (1) a free-market system is a system that enables a firm to market its products in a way that does not interfere with one's economic freedom; (2) the exploitation of cheap labor has become one of the main strategies for businesses to maximize advantages; (3) the vulnerability of workers from economic theory demands employers to pay decent wages in exchange for labor demand; and (4) the social injustice issues that have arisen due to this liberalization

In the burst of sophisticated platforms, it reached its peak where people worship and preach their rights of freedom of speech.  We witnessed a subsequent arose issue where people questioned the imposed restrictions on them in the realm of social media platforms by the authority. Nonetheless, the merely conferred freedom of speech will bring public disharmony. It was because people are exposed to and choose to be permeated by personal media applications. Thus, via the platforms, people are inclined to voice, issue and navigate their statements based on feelings, thoughts, and opinions without contemplating the effects and rationale of it. Normally, the statement is controversial while dripping at the edge of the sensitive topic while creating social disharmony and triggering social bonding. Thus, principle of Social Contract was brought in order to justify the restrictions imposed by the authority. At the same time, people used Social Contract as a defense to uphold their rights. Nevertheless, it may lead to numerous problems with the absence of restrictions. Besides, Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram and etc. were the examples of personal media platforms the writer referred to. Thus, the thrust of the paper is to examine to what extent the government may impose restrictions on their citizens via personal media platforms in relation to Social Contracts and the right of freedom of speech. Thus, the writers will conduct the paper through a qualitative approach which is a pure literature review. The gist of limitation is where the personal media platform would be focused, and restrictions referred to which were imposed by the governmental authorities instead of the personal media administrator. The The paper suggests that, notwithstanding the conventional Social Contract theory, the writers argued that the restrictions shall be imposed on personal media users.

Secularism is a political ideology that disintegrates religion from state governance. While secularism may work for countries where the majority professed religion that has no specific legal system viz. Christianity, it begins to exhibit its ineptness in countries that either have a multicultural identity or adopt a systematic religion like Islam as its official religion. To unravel this, secularism acquiesced to embody two divisions of secularism entailing freedom of religion and freedom from religion. The objective of the writing is to resolve the conflicts of the secularism ideology in multicultural state.  The methodology adopted in the research is doctrinal legal research which employed qualitative research. For multicultural counterparts, the absolute disintegration of religion raises difficulties, hence, they opt for the secular concept of freedom of religion. However, from the Islamic perspective, secularism contrasts with Islamic teachings as it is conclusive in every aspect of human life. It has its own foundations and laws that shall be followed at all times. Additionally, the impacts of secularism on the social, educational, and moral aspects have made its germaneness be put in question. Thus, there must be a law to regulate the abovementioned matter in order to ensure the community live with peace and harmony

The Malaysian judiciary is deeply connected with political influence in reality. Malaysia’s democratic system follows upon a government in charge of administration of the country, and has rights to take part in amendments and legislating process of constitutional provisions. Furthermore, the 1988 crisis marked the beginning of the judiciary’s darkest path where the Lord President, Tun Salleh Abas was being removed for the sake of the ruling party at that time. In 2008, the Malaysian government under the former Prime Minister Mahathir Muhammad influenced the judicial institution through constitutional amendment. This paper seeks to address the issues arised through judicial decision making by influence of politics, in ethics, jurisprudence theory and critique on its appropriation to allow political judgement and how Malaysia has overcome the crisis of judicial independence. Our findings conclude that Malaysia has made proper attempts to combat corruption and political influence in the judiciary institution. Although public perception has yet to prevail, in years to come the integrity in the judiciary will increase as the current judicial administration under Yang Amat Arif Tun Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat illustrates an honest and fair view of the law for all.

This paper argues that Iran needs to review and reform its press legal regime with much greater consideration for new technologies in today’s information society arena. A free press is one of the few, and possibly the only, means to force the government to be held accountable for its actions. The history of press law in the Islamic Republic of Iran (IRI) dates back to the creation of the first legislation (1930) in this country. Today, with the innovative advances in communication and the needs of “netizens” (a term for citizens who use networks for communication), the IRI Press Law does not have sufficient flexibility with international documents or reflect the impact of new technologies regarding the freedom of expression. Therefore, many of the questions in this era remain unanswered