Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim

On the judicial record

Illustrates apex- and appellate-level reasoning on the constitutional relationship between citizen and State, from ouster clauses under the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 to the mandatory death penalty and the limits of judicial review.

Abang Iskandar bin Abang Hashim appears in this collection sitting in the Federal Court and the Court of Appeal, and the docket is weighted toward constitutional and public law at the highest levels. Preventive-detention law is a recurring theme, including the effect of an ouster clause under section 15B of the Prevention of Crime Act 1959 and the extent to which it can exclude judicial review of a detention. Constitutional challenges to primary legislation feature strongly, among them the validity of the mandatory death penalty for trafficking under section 39B of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952. Judicial review and the jurisdictional boundary between the civil and Syariah courts is addressed in an appeal concerning the validity of a religious authority's decision. Contempt of court appears in a matter on the grounds for setting aside a leave order granted under Order 52 rule 3(1) of the Rules of Court 2012. Private-law questions of general importance recur, including the indefeasibility of title and whether a party is an immediate or a subsequent purchaser in good faith under the land legislation, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to grant a consequential order, and a claim for exemplary and aggravated damages arising from a death in custody, engaging section 8(2) of the Civil Law Act 1956. Because the Federal Court and Court of Appeal sit in panels and their rulings bind or guide the courts below, these decisions settle points of general importance rather than merely resolving the dispute at hand. Private individuals are referred to by role; corporate, governmental, media and statutory parties are named. A recurring concern is the reach of judicial oversight over executive and legislative action — whether an ouster clause can bar review, whether a mandatory sentence is constitutional, and where the civil courts' jurisdiction ends. The collection illustrates apex- and appellate-level reasoning on the constitutional relationship between the citizen and the State.