1. ) SIS FORUM (MALAYSIA) 2. ) XXXX v 1. ) XXXX 2. ) MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR 3. ) Kerajaan Negeri Selangor

01f-23-09-2023w Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) 18 June 2025 • 01(f)-23-09/2023(W) • 71 min read
23 cases cited (0 SG, 23 foreign)

Catchwords

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review - Application for - Challenging validity of fatwa - Whether the Fatwa on a whole is valid having regard to the fact that it purports to suggest that certain federal authorities take specific action against the first appellant (specifically) and other persons (including the second appellant) generally - Whether the fatwa could legally apply to SIS Forum (Malaysia) (a company limited by guarantee, i.e., an artificial legal person) and non-Muslim individuals - Whether the fatwa could - Direct federal agencies to block social media content - Mandate confiscation of publications (a power reserved under federal laws like the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984) - Whether a gazetted fatwa (under Section 49, ARIE 2003) qualifies as subsidiary legislation and is thus reviewable for Constitutionality – Reasonableness. CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Jurisdiction - Civil and Syariah courts - Challenging validity of fatwa - Conflict between Article 121(1) (vesting judicial power in civil courts) and Article 121(1A) (excluding civil courts from Syariah matters) - Whether civil courts can review a fatwa’s legality (not religious substance) - Whether the Selangor Fatwa Committee overstepped state powers under - Item 1, State List - Federal List -Whether the fatwa violated freedom of speech (Article 10) and freedom of religion (Article 11) - Whether a gazetted fatwa (state law) can override the Federal Constitution - Can a corporation (SIS Forum) be considered a "person professing Islam" under Item 1, State List.

Practice Areas

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW: Judicial review CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Jurisdiction

Judges (5)

Abdul Karim bin Abdul Jalil Coram Abu Bakar bin Jais Delivered Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim Coram Nallini Pathmanathan Coram Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat Delivered

Counsel (19)

Chambers of Zainul Rijal Firm Fahri, Azzat & Co. Firm Muda Firm Selangor State Legal Advisor's Office Firm Aidil bin Khalid Counsel Respondent Ali Huzaifah bin Shariff Ahmed Counsel Respondent Danial Farhan bin Zainul Rijal Counsel Respondent Dato' Malik Imtiaz Sarwar Counsel Appellant Dato' Salim bin Soib @ Hamid Counsel Respondent Husna binti Abdul Halim Counsel Respondent Majdah binti Muda Counsel Respondent Mohamed Hanaiff bin Khatri Counsel Respondent Muhammad Hariz bin Md Yusoff Counsel Respondent Nur Fatin Syakinah binti Kamarudin Counsel Respondent Sabrina Ameen Counsel Appellant Surendra Ananth Counsel Appellant Yusfarizal bin Yusoff Counsel Respondent Yvonne Lim Counsel Appellant Zainul Rijal bin Abu Bakar Counsel Respondent

Parties (5)

Kerajaan Negeri Selangor Respondent MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR Respondent Sis Forum Appellant Xxxx Appellant Xxxx Respondent

Case Significance

1. ) SIS FORUM (MALAYSIA) 2. ) XXXX v 1. ) XXXX 2. ) MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELAN... is a Federal Court (Mahkamah Persekutuan) decision dated June 18, 2025 (citation: 01f-23-09-2023w). <p>SIS Forum (Malaysia) and Zainah Anwar challenged the validity of a fatwa issued by the Selangor Fatwa Committee, raising constitutional questions about civil court jurisdiction over fatwas and potential violations of freedom of speech and religion. The majority of the Federal Court held that civil courts have jurisdiction to review the legality of a fatwa's exercise of power without reviewing its religious substance, as Article 121(1A) does not oust civil court jurisdiction over constitutiona The panel comprised Abdul Karim bin Abdul Jalil, Abu Bakar bin Jais, Amar Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim, Nallini Pathmanathan and Tengku Maimun binti Tuan Mat, with Abu Bakar bin Jais delivering the judgment.

Summary

SIS Forum (Malaysia) and Zainah Anwar challenged the validity of a fatwa issued by the Selangor Fatwa Committee, raising constitutional questions about civil court jurisdiction over fatwas and potential violations of freedom of speech and religion. The majority of the Federal Court held that civil courts have jurisdiction to review the legality of a fatwa's exercise of power without reviewing its religious substance, as Article 121(1A) does not oust civil court jurisdiction over constitutional and administrative law issues. However, the minority held the dispute was within Syariah Court jurisdiction, and the appeal's outcome was split.

What was the outcome of 1. ) SIS FORUM (MALAYSIA) 2. ) XXXX v 1. ) XXXX 2. ) MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELAN...?

<p>SIS Forum (Malaysia) and Zainah Anwar challenged the validity of a fatwa issued by the Selangor Fatwa Committee, raising constitutional questions a...

Statutes Cited

Communications and Multimedia Act 1998
s 3
Companies Act 2016 (Cap 777)
Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (Cap 91)
s 78
Federal Constitution
Art 11(4)
Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984
s 7

Cases Cited (23)

MY (23)
[1971] 1 MLJ 265 [1992] 3 CLJ 1675 [1997] 2 MLJ 829 [1998] 2 MLJ 513 [2003] 3 CLJ 289 [2003] 3 MLJ 705 [2004] 2 MLJ 529 [2007] 5 MLJ 101 [2009] 6 MLJ 354 [2017] 3 MLJ 561 [2018] 3 CLJ 145 [2019] 5 CLJ 780 [2020] 2 MLJ 277 [2020] 3 AMR 154 [2020] 4 MLJ 213 [2021] 1 MLJ 120 [2021] 2 MLJ 181 [2022] 2 MLJ 356 [2022] 3 CLJ 339 [2022] 3 MLJ 356 [2023] 4 CLJ 449 [2024] 1 MLJ 851 [2024] 2 MLJ 150