Article 3: What the Constitution Says About Islam, and What Article 11 Says Alongside It

Two provisions of the Federal Constitution sit next to each other and are quoted constantly, but rarely in full. Here is the text.

Article 3(1) reads, in the official reprint of the Federal Constitution:

“Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

That is the whole of the first clause — one sentence with two halves joined by a semicolon. What follows below is the rest of Article 3, the rest of Article 11, and the specific points in the text where the two provisions — and a few others — cross-reference each other.

At a glance

Provision	Article 3 (Religion of the Federation) and Article 11 (Freedom of religion)
Located in	Federal Constitution — Article 3 sits in Part I (The States, Religion and Law of the Federation); Article 11 sits in Part II (Fundamental Liberties)
Article 3, clauses	Five: (1) declaration; (2)–(3) Rulers as Heads of Islam in their States; (4) non-derogation; (5) Yang di-Pertuan Agong as Head of Islam in the Federal Territories
Article 11, clauses	Five: (1) right to profess, practise and propagate; (2) no compelled payment for another religion; (3) rights of religious groups; (4) control of propagation to Muslims; (5) subject to public order, health and morality
Express textual link	Article 3(4): “Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution”
Related provisions	Article 121(1A) (civil courts excluded from Syariah court matters); Ninth Schedule, State List, item 1 (state power over Islamic law and Syariah courts)
Administered by	Interpreted and applied by the courts; amended only via the Article 159 procedure

Article 3, in full

The Attorney General’s Chambers’ official reprint (as at 15 October 2020) sets out Article 3 as follows.

Clause (1). “Islam is the religion of the Federation; but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.”

Clause (2). In every State other than States without a Ruler, the Ruler’s position as Head of the religion of Islam in that State is fixed “in the manner and to the extent acknowledged and declared by the Constitution of that State,” and, subject to that State Constitution, all the rights, privileges, prerogatives and powers the Ruler enjoys as Head of that religion “are unaffected and unimpaired.” For acts, observances or ceremonies which the Conference of Rulers has agreed should extend to the Federation as a whole, each Ruler authorises the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to represent him in his capacity as Head of Islam.

Clause (3). The Constitutions of Malacca, Penang, Sabah and Sarawak — the four States that historically had no Ruler of their own — must each make provision conferring on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong the position of Head of the religion of Islam in that State.

Clause (4). “Nothing in this Article derogates from any other provision of this Constitution.”

Clause (5). “Notwithstanding anything in this Constitution the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall be the Head of the religion of Islam in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya”; Parliament may make law for this purpose to regulate Islamic religious affairs and to constitute a council that advises the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on matters of Islam.

Article 11, in full

The same reprint sets out Article 11, headed “Freedom of religion,” as follows.

Clause (1). “Every person has the right to profess and practise his religion and, subject to Clause (4), to propagate it.”

Clause (2). “No person shall be compelled to pay any tax the proceeds of which are specially allocated in whole or in part for the purposes of a religion other than his own.”

Clause (3). Every religious group has the right (a) to manage its own religious affairs; (b) to establish and maintain institutions for religious or charitable purposes; and (c) to acquire and own property and hold and administer it in accordance with law.

Clause (4). “State law and in respect of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya, federal law may control or restrict the propagation of any religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam.”

Clause (5). “This Article does not authorize any act contrary to any general law relating to public order, public health or morality.”

Where the text of the two provisions cross-references

Read on their own, Article 3 and Article 11 sit in different Parts of the Constitution and answer different questions — Article 3 addresses the position of Islam and of the Rulers, while Article 11 sets out a right belonging to every person and every religious group. The Constitution’s own text links them at three specific points.

• Article 3(4) is the general link: it states plainly that Article 3 “derogates” from nothing else in the Constitution, meaning its declaration does not, on its own wording, cut down any other provision — including Article 11.
• Article 11(4) is the specific link running the other way: it is Article 11 itself, not Article 3, that permits state law (or federal law in the Federal Territories) to control or restrict the propagation of religious doctrine or belief among persons professing the religion of Islam. The restriction in the text applies to propagation directed at Muslims specifically; Article 11(1)‘s general right to profess, practise and propagate is not itself qualified by Article 3.
• Article 4(1), the supremacy clause, applies to both: any law inconsistent with the Constitution — including with either Article 3 or Article 11 — is void to the extent of the inconsistency.

Other provisions the text points to

Two further parts of the Constitution carry their own express text on Islam and are worth reading alongside Articles 3 and 11, without going beyond what they say.

Article 121(1A). In Part IX, on the Judiciary, this clause states: “The courts referred to in Clause (1) shall have no jurisdiction in respect of any matter within the jurisdiction of the Syariah courts.” Clause (1) is what establishes the two civil High Courts. Article 121(1A) is therefore the textual boundary between the civil courts and the Syariah courts, stated as an exclusion of jurisdiction rather than as an amendment to Article 3 or Article 11.

Ninth Schedule, State List, item 1. This item gives the State Legislatures power to make laws on, among other things, “Islamic law and personal and family law of persons professing the religion of Islam,” the “constitution, organization and procedure of Syariah courts, which shall have jurisdiction only over persons professing the religion of Islam,” and “the control of propagating doctrines and beliefs among persons professing the religion of Islam” — the same propagation-control subject matter that Article 11(4) permits state law to address. The Schedule text also carves out an exception: this item does not apply “with respect to the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya,” consistent with Article 3(5) placing the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, rather than a State Ruler, as Head of Islam there.

Common mistakes

• Quoting Article 3(1) without the second half. The clause is one sentence: the declaration that Islam is the religion of the Federation is immediately followed, in the same sentence, by “but other religions may be practised in peace and harmony in any part of the Federation.” Dropping the second half changes what the clause actually says.
• Treating Article 3 as if it says “Malaysia is an Islamic state.” That phrase does not appear in the text. Article 3(1) declares Islam “the religion of the Federation” — a form of words the Constitution itself uses and does not further define within Article 3.
• Assuming Article 11(4) restricts propagation generally. The clause’s own wording restricts propagation only “among persons professing the religion of Islam.” It does not, by its text, restrict propagation of other religions among non-Muslims.
• Assuming the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is Head of Islam everywhere. Article 3(5) names three places specifically — the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya. In the States with Rulers, Article 3(2) keeps that position with the Ruler, and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong acts only where the Conference of Rulers has agreed a ceremony or observance should extend to the Federation as a whole.
• Reading Article 3(4) as resolving how Article 3 and Article 11 apply together in any given case. The clause states only that Article 3 does not derogate from other provisions of the Constitution; it does not itself set out how a court should weigh the two provisions against each other in a dispute. That question is decided case by case by the courts and is outside the scope of this page.

What’s next

For how Article 3 and Article 11 sit inside the rest of the constitutional text — the Parts, the fundamental-liberties chapter, and the amendment procedure in Article 159 — see the Federal Constitution overview. For the two offices Article 3 names directly, see the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Conference of Rulers (Majlis Raja-Raja). For where Article 121(1A) sits among Malaysia’s courts, see Malaysia’s court hierarchy. For the non-constitutional national declaration that separately names “Keluhuran Perlembagaan” (the Supremacy of the Constitution) among its principles, see the Rukun Negara.