In a historic decision, the Federal Court of Malaysia has invalidated the 2021 amendments passed by the Kelantan state assembly to extend sharia law to cover criminal offenses, citing the assembly’s lack of authority to enact laws falling under federal jurisdiction as delineated in the constitution.
The amendments, introduced by the Kelantan state assembly in 2021, aimed to vest sharia law with the authority to address criminal offenses, reflecting the increasing influence of religious conservatism in the state. However, a nine-member bench in the federal court unanimously declared the amendments unconstitutional, asserting that the state had overstepped its powers by encroaching into federal jurisdiction.
Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, who presided over the case, specified that only two out of the 18 provisions in Kelantan’s amended sharia law were found to be consistent with the constitution. The remaining provisions were deemed invalid and therefore ineligible for implementation by the state.
The Pan-Malaysian Islamic Party (PAS), a key advocate for the expansion of sharia law in Kelantan, expressed disappointment at the court’s ruling. The party’s deputy chief minister, Mohamed Fadzil Hassan, stressed the necessity for the federal government to amend the constitution to grant greater powers to the sharia courts, alluding to the majority held by the current Prime Minister, Anwar Ibrahim.
This legal dispute originated from a constitutional challenge filed in 2022 by lawyer Nik Elin Nik Abdul Rashid and her daughter, contesting the constitutionality of the amendments to Kelantan’s sharia law. The proposed changes would have empowered state religious authorities to prosecute individuals for offenses such as sodomy, vandalism of places of worship, vice, and incest.
The court’s decision has elicited diverse reactions from various segments of society. While supporters of the state’s efforts to expand sharia powers demonstrated solidarity outside the court, Nik Elin expressed contentment with the ruling, emphasizing its benefits for all Malaysians.
According to Chief Justice Tengku Maimun, the court’s decision centered solely on examining the legal overreach of the state in passing the controversial amendments, rather than on the position of Islam and sharia courts in the country.
In response to the verdict, Religious Affairs Minister Mohd Na’im Mokhtar urged for calm and affirmed that the government would continue to endorse the existence of the sharia courts in adherence to the federal constitution. He also pledged to make necessary adjustments to existing plans in accordance with the court’s ruling.
The ruling comes at a juncture when the government led by Prime Minister Anwar is encountering challenges in garnering support from the Malay-Muslim majority, which has increasingly turned to opposition parties, including PAS, due to concerns over the escalating cost of living and perceived neglect of their rights and privileges by the political elite.
As Malaysia grapples with the complexities surrounding the expansion of sharia law and the distribution of power between federal and state jurisdictions, it is imperative to uphold the tenets of the constitution while addressing the diverse perspectives and interests of the population.
Leave a Reply