SIS FORUM (MALAYSIA) v. KERAJAAN NEGERI SELANGOR; MAJLIS AGAMA ISLAM SELANGOR (INTERVENER)
FEDERAL COURT, PUTRAJAYA
TENGKU MAIMUN TUAN MAT CJ;
ROHANA YUSUF PCA;
AZAHAR MOHAMED CJ (MALAYA);
ABANG ISKANDAR CJ (SABAH AND SARAWAK);
MOHD ZAWAWI SALLEH FCJ;
VERNON ONG LAM KIAT FCJ;
ZALEHA YUSOF FCJ;
HARMINDAR SINGH DHALIWAL FCJ;
RHODZARIAH BUJANG FCJ
[CASE NO: BKA-1-01-2021(W)]
21 FEBRUARY 2022
[2022] CLJ JT(3)

Abstract - Section 66A of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003 which seeks to give the Syariah courts the jurisdiction and power to hear and decide on judicial review, being a provision which the Selangor State Legislature (SSL) has no power or competency to make, is unconstitutional and void. The substantive jurisdiction of the Syariah Courts is strictly defined by Item 1, State List, Ninth Schedule of the Federal Constitution ; the issue of the absence of the power of judicial review or the power to grant public law remedies in Item 1 aside, it is plain that none of the limbs in Item 1 can be construed as conferring power on SSL to enact s. 66A or to enable the Syariah Court to engage in judicial review. This said, the judicial power of the Federation, of which the 'constitutional' and 'statutory' judicial review are a specie, is by constitutional design exclusively vested in the Civil Superior Courts, as to clothe them with supervisory jurisdiction over legislation passed by any Legislature, as well as the jurisdiction to decide on constitutional issues or to issue public law remedies; the Syariah Courts, on the other hand, for not sharing the same constitutional guarantees of judicial independence as the Civil Superior Courts, are as a matter of constitutional policy incapable of exercising judicial power.