The judiciary of Malaysia and the Republic of Philippines are similar, but owing to different historical influences, both judiciary systems have developed differently to perform the same purpose of upholding the law as enacted by the legislature alongside the executive.
The history of the Malaysian judiciary traces across three major timelines; that is, the pre-British colonial era, the British colonial period, and the post-independence of Malaysia. The pre-British colonial era saw the reign of the Malay Sultanates as its earliest record of an existence of a proper legal system for the administration of justice, where previously disputes …show more content…
The segregation of the two court systems was also retained where civil courts now have jurisdiction to hear all cases apart from matters concerning Islamic law while applying English law in accordance to the provisions of the Civil Law Act.
While the Malaysian judiciary is largely formed from British influence, the Philippines’ judiciary is based on the American’s influence. The history of the Philippines’ judiciary spans across six major timelines; that is, the pre-Spanish Conquest, the Spanish Regime, the American Regime, the Commonwealth period, the Martial Law period, and subsequently the post-independence period in which Philippines recovered its status of a ‘republic’ country.
Before the Spanish invaded Philippines, the indigenous Filipinos had their own system of laws in administering justice derived from customs, usages, and tradition. The unit of government was the ‘barangay’, which was a settlement consisting of about thirty to hundred families. A chieftain called the ‘datu’ headed each barangay which were independent of each other, and acted as the executive, legislative, and the judiciary over his barangay. As such, disputes in the barangay are heard by the datu sitting as a judge with the help of barangay elders as the jury, and wars between barangays were averted by arbitration with datus from other barangays as