Nik Elin’s case opens doors for more to challenge state syariah laws, says Mohd Na'im

The Star

The recent apex court ruling to deem several provisions under the Kelantan syariah law criminal enactment as unconstitutional could pave the way for others to file similar petitions, says Datuk Dr Mohd Na'im Mokhtar.  When speaking at the special chambers at the Dewan Rakyat on Thursday (Feb 29), the Minister in Prime Minister's Department (Religious Affairs) acknowledged this based on the context of judicial independence.  Read more at http://tinyurl.com/4uparvdb   WATCH MORE: https://thestartv.com/c/news SUBSCRIBE: https://cutt.ly/TheStar LIKE: https://fb.com/TheStarOnline

Transcript

00:00 So what we can understand based on the decision made in the Neeline case is how far the power

00:10 that has been established under the constitution of the parliament, the power given to the

00:18 state to make laws and the power given to the body of parliament to make laws.

00:27 So in the context of the decision made by the parliament, it is more determined to

00:35 associate the existing institutions of the parliament so that the body of the state

00:41 constitution or the body of the parliament respects each other, the power that is

00:49 established under the constitution of the parliament.

00:53 So I think, in the first question to Mr. Bumad, the engagement or the matter of the

01:00 matter is fair and will be done.

01:04 In relation to the trend of challenges, I think Mr. Bumad, in the context of separation

01:14 with the permission or the power of the three organs of the existing government, the

01:24 judiciary, the executive and the legislative, I think it is difficult for us to ensure

01:37 that there is an individual or any party that may file a petition in the Supreme Court

01:49 to make a challenge.

01:52 And in the context of the form of the government, the efforts of the separation and

01:59 the efforts to ensure that the judiciary is enforced will be carried out.

02:07 In the context of respecting the three organs of the existing government and the parties

02:15 that will face the court, challenging a provision that has been approved by the

02:24 state government, this power has been given under the constitution of the parliament.

02:30 As Mr. Bumad said, it was given to the parliament under article 128 of the constitution.

02:40 So, any party that feels that the provisions that have been approved by the state body

02:50 have been removed from the existing power of the state body, meaning in the context of

03:00 the Neelin case, the state body of the state of Kelantan to approve several sections in

03:06 the indictment of the crimes of the state of Kelantan.

03:09 As I understand, if we look at what happened in the Supreme Court, not all of the indictments

03:18 of the crimes of the state of Kelantan were challenged.

03:21 What was challenged were several sections in the indictment of the crimes of the state

03:25 of Kelantan on the grounds that the state body of the state has no power to approve

03:30 the provisions.

03:32 So, in this context, Mr. Bumad, first, I answer the second question earlier, in which we

03:39 want to prevent any party from facing or challenging any provision, it is quite difficult.

03:47 We do not know because this is a power.

03:49 If we look at the decision made by the parliament in the Neelin case, although we look, as I

03:58 understand, if we look at the case, usually people who want to file a stand-by locus

04:04 in a provision, challenging a provision, in the Neelin case, although it is not directly

04:11 related to locus, the parliament has decided that Neelin has a locus to face a request

04:22 to challenge a provision in the state of Kelantan.

04:25 So, what was decided in the Neelin case has opened up a wide space for any party to face

04:34 a request to challenge any provision or law as non-constitutional.

04:41 Thank you.

Category

Transcript

Recommended