Seven smokers file appeal for right to puff away at eateries

Seven individuals have now gone to the Court of Appeal to challenge the Health Ministry’s smoking ban at food outlets which was enforced beginning Jan 1.

The appellants are seeking to quash a Kuala Lumpur High Court ruling on Oct 29, which dismissed their judicial review application to uphold their right to light up at eateries.

This was confirmed by their counsel Mohd Haniff Khatri Abdulla in a text message this afternoon.

“The seven applicants, who filed the judicial review against the Health Ministry’s “blanket ban” on smoking in all eateries, have on Nov 26 (Tuesday), filed in their “Notis Rayuan” (Notice of Appeal) against the High Court order dated Oct 29, in which their judicial review was dismissed.

“We are now awaiting the Court of Appeal to process the notice of appeal and fix a case management date,” Haniff said.

On Oct 29, High Court judge Mariana Yahya dismissed the judicial review on grounds that the Health Ministry had acted within its jurisdiction, and that the enforcement of the smoking ban did not breach Articles 5 and 8 of the Federal Constitution.

Article 5 deal with an individual’s fundamental right to personal liberty while Article 8 enshrines a person’s fundamental right to equal protection before the law.

Mariana said among others that the applicants were wrong to say their rights to smoke cigarettes would be violated with the ban on cigarette smoking.

The judicial review applicants are Mohd Hanizam Yunus, 52; Zulkifli Mohamad, 56; Mohd Laisani Dollah, 46; Mohd Sufian Awaludin, 35; Ridzuan Muhammad Noor, 52; Mohd Yazid Mohd Yunus, 48 and Yuri Azhar Abdollah, 39.

They named the Health Ministry as the sole respondent.

In the application filed on Dec 31, 2018, the seven men claimed that the ban went against the Federal Constitution as smoking was not deemed a criminal activity or banned in the country.

They claimed that smokers had equal rights with non-smokers to visit and spend their time in food premises for as long as they wished.

They further claimed that the smoking ban ran contrary to the provisions and principles of law and/or went against procedures, as the respondent was never reported to have met smokers or stakeholders to discuss the enforcement of the ban beforehand.

The applicants also claimed that the government did not provide adequate facilities such as smoking areas, nor included provisions under the smoking ban for entrepreneurs to prepare their own non-smoking areas.

The Health Ministry had imposed the smoking ban at all restaurants and food premises beginning Jan 1, with a focus on educating the public till June this year.

However, in April, the educational enforcement period was extended until the end of the year. - Mkini