Ex-CJ: Nik Elin could've challenged more Kelantan syariah provisions

 

Lawyer Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul Rashid could have challenged more criminal provisions in Kelantan’s syariah law, said former chief justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad.

Hamid (above) said he had written about conflicting syariah and civil laws over 10 years ago.

“The Federal Court decided that 16 provisions of the enactment are invalid, null and void because ‘the essence of those provisions is about matters under the Federation List which only Parliament has the power to make’.

“That’s because Nik Elin only challenged 18 provisions. If she examined my writings and speeches from 10 years ago, more provisions could be challenged. I don't want to mention it,” he said in a statement posted to his website yesterday.

Last week, Nik Elin and her daughter Tengku Yasmin Nastasha Tengku Abdul Rahman succeeded in their Federal Court bid to nullify the validity of the state’s 16 out of 18 syariah criminal provisions.

A nine-person bench chaired by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat in an 8-1 majority decision allowed the petition.

No standing in filing bid

Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak Abdul Rahman Sebli, who held the dissenting judgment in the decision said that the mother-daughter duo had no locus standi in challenging the matter as they were not affected by the enforcement of those provisions.

It was important to ensure that the judiciary only allowed petitioners with locus standi to continue their challenges, he said.

Lawyer Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul Rashid

Hamid said even if the dissenting judgment was “correct”, it only ruled that Nik Elin had no qualifications to start the lawsuit.

“Perhaps some might say, at least there is one judge, namely the chief judge of Sabah and Sarawak who is on their side.

“We need to understand that the judgment is only about locus standi and not about substantive issues. Even if his judgment is correct, it simply decides that Nik Elin does not have the qualifications to start the lawsuit.

“Tomorrow someone else can file a new action challenging the same provisions,” he added.