This article presents a roadmap for examining the phenomenon of monarchy in Asia, which we conceive as a pluralist institution in a twofold manner. First, many monarchies discharge a wide range of roles and responsibilities ranging from the symbolic to the religious to the legal-political. These varied functions can be usefully captured under the notion of constitutional guardianship, and call for intersectional analysis. Second, it is common for monarchies to have metamorphosed from being purely endogenous institutions to becoming ones embedded in a scheme of limited, constitutional government under the influence of ideas from elsewhere. Monarchies should accordingly be viewed as a form of legal métissage, viz. a braiding of local and extraneous ideas, practices, and rules. In this sense, a law-and-society approach is more likely to reveal the nature of monarchies than a strictly legal-doctrinal approach, although some of the latter is needed to fully appreciate the former’s significance.

This paper defines constitutional ethnography as the cultural study of constitutionalism through its symbolic representations. By focusing on the materiality of constitutionalism as embodied in various state ceremonies such as ceremonies of “royal octroy” (constitution-granting ceremonies) as well as in state monuments honouring the Constitution, it strives to offer an ethnography of a polity’s constitutional identity. In this paper, I argue that in Thailand, Westernized Hindu-Buddhist state ceremonies and monuments using Westernized Hindu-Buddhist symbolism represent the Thai monarch as the ultimate law-giver holding permanent “constituent power” and therefore yielding extra-constitutional customary powers pre-existing the Constitution. This representation, in turn, informs Thai constitutional identity as defined incrementally by courts and jurists since the early twentieth century, which in turn informs present Thai constitutional interpretation. Therefore, this paper argues that the study of state ceremonies can be a useful entry point into the analysis of a “constitutional culture” shaping modes of constitutional interpretation.

The product of an internationalized peace process, Cambodia’s 1993 Constitution restored the monarchy and endowed the Crown with a political safeguarding role that successive kings have been unable to fulfil in practice. After a brief survey of the tragic modern history of Cambodia’s monarchy, this paper outlines the formal constitutional role of the king, highlighting the central dichotomy between the provisions that promise that the king “shall reign but shall not govern” and those that provide the king a more active role as “guarantor.” The paper highlights how this fundamental ambiguity has been borne-out publicly, by focusing on a handful of specific instances in which both King Sihanouk and King Sihamoni are understood to have been strategically absent from the country to avoid signing controversial legislation. Short of providing a veto power in the legislative process, the king’s safeguarding role is shown to manifest in the symbolic denial of royal legitimacy.

This article examines the constitutional nature of the Malaysian monarchies in their social context. We discuss the evolution of the monarchies through pre-colonial, colonial, and post-colonial history, and account for their survival despite several attempts to curb their powers, including restriction of the royal assent and sovereign immunity. It is argued that the powers of the monarchies respond to their historical role and social embeddedness of the monarchies, stretching the role of the Rulers beyond the Westminster norms as set out in constitutional texts. Moving to contemporary issues, we see the assertion of the right to uphold the Constitution in relation to prime-ministerial appointments, and acting on advice. Here, the monarchies reflect a braiding of both traditional elements and Westminster constitutional norms.

This article describes post-colonial state-making in the absolute monarchy of Brunei. After detailing the Sultan’s powers, contextualizing the monarchy’s stability, and introducing its state ideology, Melayu Islam Beraja (“MIB”), the article addresses formal laws, such as Brunei’s Constitution and a new Islamic penal code, which are symbolically significant for the MIB state’s (self-)legitimation but have little immediate relevance to many Bruneians’ lives. The article, therefore, shifts its focus to normative spheres that receive much less scholarly attention but, arguably, should—namely state-rituals like the Sultan’s three-week-long birthday celebrations. These, and other non-legal spheres, including, also, royal speeches, contain normative aspects that reflect and impact key developments in the MIB state. Grounded in the Royal Birthday’s and Islamic penal code’s analysis, the final part problematizes stereotypes of Brunei being a “sharia state” vis-à-vis its multidirectional normative messages and ability to hybridize broad cultural influences for the ruling system’s benefit.

This article provides a descriptive account of the evolution of the Bhutanese monarchy, and normative claims about its endurance and its nature, suggesting that the monarchy is both the expression of as well as the guardian of the country’s constitutional identity. Bhutan became a democratic constitutional monarchy by adopting the written Constitution in 2008 after a successful 100 years of hereditary monarchy. The willingness of successive monarchs to evolve based on changing times, their ability to ensure stability and continuity, and work for the benefits of the people and country guided by the principles of Buddhist kingship seem to have contributed not only in them benefitting from unqualified support of the people, but also in attaining the status of an expression of Bhutanese constitutional identity.

After the 9/11 incidents, global counter-terrorism efforts have focused increasingly on community policing as a proactive and preventive approach to thwarting terrorism. This article explores the developments, tensions, and prospects of counter-terrorism community policing (“CTCP”) in China. By applying the concepts of police legitimacy and social capital to the normative and operational framework of CTCP, I argue that this vital counter-terrorism endeavour is fraught with problems, for both Chinese police to procure effective civic co-operation and the local community to develop its capacity as a self-reliant player in preventing terrorism. More specifically, community co-operation in China’s CTCP is largely an obligatory process in the form of forced mobilization by local bureaucracies that does not necessarily entail trust and support from citizens based on their legitimacy judgement. My analysis on social capital building in Chinese communities further suggests that both police and citizens are unable to form deep and meaningful partnerships for counter-terrorism. While an authoritarian regime like China is reluctant to cede substantial power and authority to people in most of all aspects of policing, the public has become apathetic towards and alienated from voluntary collaboration with police in formal community affairs—a dichotomy lies between reality and ideal in China’s CTCP.

The Hong Kong statute criminalizing disrespect of the Chinese national anthem, passed in 2020, is one of many recent moves to suppress political dissent in the former British colony. The law restricts freedom of political expression, but its constitutionality is practically assured courtesy of earlier decisions upholding laws against flag desecration. This article draws on sociological and political literature to argue that symbolic nationalism, particularly when given the force of law, is a tool of the authoritarian state. Against this backdrop, it critically and comparatively analyses Hong Kong judicial decisions upholding the suppression of symbolic dissent, assessing their doctrinal coherence, normative defensibility, and consequences. It concludes with observations on the efficacy of attempts to enforce patriotic orthodoxy and on how deference to authoritarianism affects the rule of law.