LOO ZHI WEN 1. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 2. KETUA POLIS NEGARA MALAYSIA 3. KETUA POLIS NEGERI JOHOR 4. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

LOO ZHI WEN 1. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA 2. KETUA POLIS NEGARA MALAYSIA 3. KETUA POLIS NEGERI JOHOR 4. KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

The restriction order was ultra vires and a nullity because the grounds and allegations of fact omitted the essential elements that the activity involved a substantial body of persons and that the applicant was a member of such a body as required by the SPMA read with Article 149 and the preamble; those omissions...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
BA-25-101-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Parties
Applicant: LOO ZHI WEN; Respondent 1: TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA; Respondent 2: KETUA POLIS NEGARA, MALAYSIA; Respondent 3: KETUA POLIS NEGERI JOHOR; Respondent 4: KERAJAAN MALAYSIA
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
2 December 2021
Case Number
BA-25-101-11/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Procedural Posture
Judicial Review / Final Judgment of High Court
Outcome
Certiorari granted; restriction order quashed; applicant released
Legal Topics
Preventive Detention, Dangerous Drugs (special Preventive Measures) Act 1985, Article 149 Federal Constitution, Restriction Order (ro), Certiorari
Administrative Law Constitutional Law Criminal Law Preventive Detention Dangerous Drugs (special Preventive Measures) Act 1985 Article 149 Federal Constitution Restriction Order (ro) Certiorari

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

LOO ZHI WEN

Applicant

TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI MALAYSIA

Respondent 1

KETUA POLIS NEGARA, MALAYSIA

Respondent 2

KETUA POLIS NEGERI JOHOR

Respondent 3

KERAJAAN MALAYSIA

Respondent 4

Procedural Posture

Judicial Review / Final Judgment of High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the restriction order complied with s 6(3) SPMA and Article 149/preamble requirement of involvement of a substantial body of persons
  2. 2 Whether the allegations of fact sufficiently pleaded that the applicant was a member of a substantial body of persons involved in trafficking
  3. 3 Whether defects in the allegations of fact could be cured by affidavit in reply

Ratio Decidendi

The restriction order was ultra vires and a nullity because the grounds and allegations of fact omitted the essential elements that the activity involved a substantial body of persons and that the applicant was a member of such a body as required by the SPMA read with Article 149 and the preamble; those omissions showed the Deputy Minister did not properly apply his mind and cannot be cured by affidavit, so certiorari was warranted.

Court Disposition

Certiorari granted; restriction order quashed; applicant released

Orders

  • Order of certiorari quashing the Restriction Order dated 30-09-2020 issued under s 6(3) SPMA
  • Applicant set at liberty forthwith