MUHAMAD ZULZAMRI BIN HARUN v 1. ) LEFTENAN KOLONEL MOHD FAEZAL BIN MAHAMAD TUDM, YANG DIPERTUA MAHKAMAH TENTERA 2. ) BRIGEDIER JENERAL DR. NORAZRIN BIN SHAMSUDIN TUDM, PEGAWAI SIDANG MAHKAMAH TENTERA/PEGAWAI PENGESAH 3. ) TIMBALAN PANGLIMA TENTERA UDARA LEFTENAN JENERAL DATO’ HAJI MUHAMAD NORAZLAN BIN ARIS 4. ) MAJLIS ANGKATAN TENTERA 5. ) Kerajaan Malaysia
Catchwords
Judicial Review – Military law – Court-martial – Convening authority – Whether convening officer possessed requisite command power – Temporary attachment of accused to Legal Branch – Whether accused was “under command” within meaning of s 104(4) Armed Forces Act 1972 – Delegation of power – Whether lack of command renders proceedings void ab initio – Effect of jurisdictional defect – Armed Forces Act 1972, s 104 – Federal Constitution, arts 5(1), 8(1), 137(1). Military law – Court-martial – Drug offence – Positive urine test – Alleged non-compliance with PMAT 4/2009 – Use of non-prescribed forms – Absence of Donor’s Declaration – Whether procedural irregularities vitiate proceedings – Chain of custody – Role of chemist – Whether failure to produce calibration certificate fatal – Armed Forces Act 1972, ss 51, 87 – Evidence Act 1950, s 90A. Military law – Standing orders – Proof of existence and validity – Whether standing order duly made and published under s 51(3) Armed Forces Act 1972 – Whether accused knew or ought to have known of prohibition – Presumption of knowledge – Ignorance of standing orders – Whether Division One Order relevant to proof of knowledge. Military law – Court-martial procedure – Recording of finding – Whether announcement of “guilty” sufficient compliance with r 82 and Seventh Schedule Armed Forces (Court-Martial) Rules of Procedure 1976 – Whether omission to use word “conviction” fatal. Military law – Confirmation proceedings – Duty of confirming officer – Whether confirming officer obliged to review full trial record – Failure to file petition against finding – Scope of powers under ss 122, 123, 125 Armed Forces Act 1972 – Whether confirmation invalid. Judicial Review – Scope – Military tribunals – Distinction between appeal and review – Whether High Court may re-evaluate evidence – Exceptional circumstances – Jurisdictional error and breach of natural justice – Discretionary relief.
Practice Areas
Judges (1)
Parties (6)
BRIGEDIER JENERAL DR. NORAZRIN BIN SHAMSUDIN TUDM, PEGAWAI SIDANG MAHKAMAH TENTERA/PEGAWAI PENGESAH Respondent Kerajaan Malaysia Respondent LEFTENAN KOLONEL MOHD FAEZAL BIN MAHAMAD TUDM, YANG DIPERTUA MAHKAMAH TENTERA Respondent Majlis Angkatan Tentera Respondent TIMBALAN PANGLIMA TENTERA UDARA LEFTENAN JENERAL DATO’ HAJI MUHAMAD NORAZLAN BIN ARIS Respondent Muhamad Zulzamri bin Harun Applicant
Case Significance
MUHAMAD ZULZAMRI BIN HARUN v 1. ) LEFTENAN KOLONEL MOHD FAEZAL BIN MAHAMAD TU... is a High Court (Mahkamah Tinggi) decision dated November 25, 2025 (citation: ta-25-3-12-2024). The case was decided by Yusrin Faidz bin Yusoff.
What was the outcome of MUHAMAD ZULZAMRI BIN HARUN v 1. ) LEFTENAN KOLONEL MOHD FAEZAL BIN MAHAMAD TU...?
MUHAMAD ZULZAMRI BIN HARUN v 1. ) LEFTENAN KOLONEL MOHD FAEZAL BIN MAHAMAD TU... is a High Court decision dated November 25, 2025. The case was heard by Yusrin Faidz bin Yusoff. See the full judgment for details.