Copying constitutions does not make the same nation
Professor A. Harding who wrote that "...Malaysia came into being on 16 September 1963...not by a new Federal Constitution, but simply by the admission of new States to the existing but renamed Federation under Article 1 of the Constitution..." See Harding (2012)
Prof. Harding has made a grave error.
Just because an entity uses the same constituion does not mean that it is the same entity. Just like UMNO baru versus the original UMNO. It may use almost a copy of the old UMNO consitution, as most other standard political associations in Malaysia, does not mean that they are the same entity or renamed entities or associations.
Legal requirements are for entitities, not similarities of names or constitutions or laws governing their formations.
Constitutions are written laws but are subject to legality requirements. If an entity, e.g. Malaysia decides to disband itself, the entity does not exist any more, as far as legality is concerned. It is the wishes of the authorities in the entity that determines the existence of the entity. Not the existence of the constitution or laws governing the entity.
If a new entity decides to adopt the same constituion, modifed and renamed, for a new entity that are made of of basically the same members but are now extended, legally, there is a new entity. There are many other documents in support of the new entity, instead of the enlarged entity. During the declaration of the new entity, Malaysia, using basically the constitution of the old entity, Malaya, new entities, North Borneo and Sarawak were deemed as having joined into a new entity, called Malaysia. It is the declaration that matters. Not the mechanisms at which this is achieved.
If similarity of constitutions is the basis to determine the state of an entity, then there are many associations in Malaysia that are the same entities then, just renamed, because that is the easiest way to register a club or association. The Registrar of Societies give booklets of samples constitutions for various types of associations. It will approve those that adopt these contitutions readily, rather than make major modifications to them. This is preposterous indeed.
As to recognition by the UN of the new entity taking over the place of the old entity, Malaya. UN is not the authority to care about the status of entities. As long as members agree that the characteristics of entities as a nation are the same, it will be accepted as the same member but with different names or even systems of governments, such as Russia, or China.
