How does Negri Sembilan aim to overturn the transgender cross-dressing ruling?

Question

Accepted Answer

Negri Sembilan to Argue Islamic Law Validity Cannot Be Tested by Constitutional Rights

The Negri Sembilan government plans to argue that Islamic state laws are beyond the scope of constitutional rights testing in its bid to overturn a court ruling that deemed a law against Muslim cross-dressing unconstitutional. This legal challenge will be presented in August before the Federal Court, which previously allowed the state government and other applicants to contest the Court of Appeal's decision. The core of the argument hinges on whether Islamic laws should be subject to review under Part II of the Federal Constitution, which enshrines fundamental liberties for all Malaysians.
Challenge to Court of Appeal's Ruling

The case stems from a Court of Appeal decision in November that declared Section 66 of the Negri Sembilan Shariah Criminal Enactment 1992 unconstitutional and void. This enactment criminalises Muslim men for wearing women's attire, punishable by a fine, imprisonment, or both. The appellate court found that this state law violated fundamental liberties, including personal liberty, equality, freedom of movement, and freedom of expression, and was discriminatory for not recognising men diagnosed with gender identity disorder.
Core Legal Argument on Islamic Law

The Negri Sembilan government's intended argument is that the validity of Islamic state laws cannot be assessed against the backdrop of constitutional rights. This position questions the applicability of Part II of the Federal Constitution, which details fundamental liberties such as equality before the law and non-discrimination, to Shariah enactments. The hearing for this specific legal point is scheduled for August 13.
Amicus Curiae Intervention

In addition to the state government, the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Council (MAIWP) will also present a similar argument as an amicus curiae, or "friend of the court." This intervention allows MAIWP to provide legal arguments and insights to assist the court in its deliberation on the complex issue of the interplay between state Islamic laws and the Federal Constitution. Other state Islamic councils are also permitted to appear in the same capacity.
Federal Court Review

The Federal Court had previously agreed to hear the challenge brought by the Negri Sembilan government and four other applicants against the Court of Appeal's ruling. The five-judge bench indicated it would specifically examine whether Section 66 of the Shariah enactment contravened Articles 5(1), 8(1), 8(2), 9(2), and 10(1)(a) of the Federal Constitution, which pertain to life and liberty, equality, freedom of movement, and freedom of speech, respectively.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

How does Negri Sembilan aim to overturn the transgender cross-dressing ruling?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends