Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Article 149 fc

Legal area

Court

6 Aug 2021

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim 1. Kerajaan Malaysia 2. Majlis Keselamatan Negara

Citation

No: 06(RS)-1-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

RS
Case number

No: 06(RS)-1-03/2019(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

The amendment Acts A566, A584 and A885 are constitutional because they did not remove a substantive royal discretion and merely provided procedural certainty for assent; however the NSCA 2016, on its pith and substance, is a national security statute with emergency‑like special powers that abridge arts 5, 9, 10 and 13 and therefore falls within the class of legislation that must be enacted under Article 149; because it was enacted as ordinary legislation and not under Article 149 it is inconsistent with the Federal Constitution and void under Article 4(1).
6 Apr 2021

LIM KEAN BOON (NO.K/P: 861202-35-5403) 1. ) 1. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA 2. ) 2. PENGUASA KANAN, PUSAT PEMULIHAN AKHLAK, BATU GAJAH, PERAK

Citation

PA-44-16-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)
Court

High Court
Case number

PA-44-16-03/2020 (Mahkamah Tinggi)

The detention order was invalid and ultra vires because the grounds and factual averments did not allege that the applicant was a member of or acted with a 'substantial body of persons' as required by Article 149 and the Preamble read into Act 316; accordingly the preventive detention power could not lawfully be exercised in this case. Other procedural complaints were dismissed as unproven or not material to the validity of the detention order.
19 Feb 2021

1. ) ROVIN JOTY A/L KODEESWARAN 2. ) DARWEESH BIN RAJA SULAIM 3. ) RAGU A/L VITEE 4. ) VELU A/L RAJAKUMAR 5. ) DEVANDREN A/L JAMES 6. ) NIVESH NAIR A/L MOHAN 1. ) 1. LEMBAGA PENCEGAHAN JENAYAH 2. PEGAWAI INKUIRI, KEMENTERIAN DALAM NEGERI 3.

Citation

05(HC)-304-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-308-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-303-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-305-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-307-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-7-01/2020(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)
Court

HC
Case number

05(HC)-304-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-308-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-303-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-305-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-307-12/2019(B); 05(HC)-7-01/2020(W) (Mahkamah Persekutuan)

Section 15B POCA is valid and constitutional: POCA was enacted under Article 149 FC and section 15B properly confines judicial review to questions of compliance with procedural requirements; Parliament may limit review by clear words in a preventive security statute and such limitation does not offend Articles 4(1) or 121(1) or amount to an unlawful usurpation of judicial power; appellants failed to prove non-compliance of procedure (including appointment challenge), therefore appeals dismissed.

Malaysia Case Law

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim 1. Kerajaan Malaysia 2. Majlis Keselamatan Negara

LIM KEAN BOON (NO.K/P: 861202-35-5403) 1. ) 1. TIMBALAN MENTERI DALAM NEGERI, MALAYSIA 2. ) 2. PENGUASA KANAN, PUSAT PEMULIHAN AKHLAK, BATU GAJAH, PERAK

1. ) ROVIN JOTY A/L KODEESWARAN 2. ) DARWEESH BIN RAJA SULAIM 3. ) RAGU A/L VITEE 4. ) VELU A/L RAJAKUMAR 5. ) DEVANDREN A/L JAMES 6. ) NIVESH NAIR A/L MOHAN 1. ) 1. LEMBAGA PENCEGAHAN JENAYAH 2. PEGAWAI INKUIRI, KEMENTERIAN DALAM NEGERI 3.