ISLAMIC LAW IN MALAYSIA

Syariah Court building on the West side in Anak Bukit, Alor Setar, Malaysia

Malaysia has a dual-track legal system comprised of civil courts running in parallel with Islamic Sharia courts where Muslim Malays can be tried on religious and moral charges. Sharia is imposed only on Muslims and deals with moral and family matters. Non-Muslims are required to follow secular laws that deal with the same matters.

Islamic law (sharia, spelled Syariah in Malaysia) and laws covering matters such as morality, inheritance, marriage and divorce. Sharia is applied on some matters throughout the country and has been applied in a more extreme manner in two Malaysian states, Kelantan and Terengganu. The Islamic Affairs Department, Jabatan Agama Islam, the national Muslim law body, was established shortly after independence and was given more power after the Sharia laws were strengthened in the 1990s.

There are laws in Malaysia’s more Islamic states that state anyone who misses Friday prayers three weeks in a row can be punished by six months in jail. Smoking, drinking or eating on Ramadan carry a jail term up to one year. “Perpetrators to sexual intercourse out of wedlock” can bring a sentence of two years. Occasionally sharia courts impose caning sentences on male Muslims caught drinking alcohol or committing adultery. Hugging or holding hands qualifies as “indecent behavior in a public place,” a crime that carries a six month prison sentence. There has been some discussion of passing laws requiring all Muslims to pay a “zakat” (religious tax) of 2.5 percent, with those not paying risking fine and up to three years in prison.

The government-backed National Fatwa Council is one of Malaysia's highest Islamic bodies. When it issues a fatwa (edict) it is up to the individual states to implement the ruling. In 2008, The fatwa council banned women from dressing or behaving like men and engaging in lesbian sex, saying it was forbidden by Islam.

Islamic Courts and Support for Sharia in Malaysia

The sharia system, which issues rulings under Islamic law, is composed of a high court and courts in each state. A system of superior and subordinate courts handles civil and criminal law. Superior courts include the Federal Court, the Court of Appeals, and two High Courts. Shariah courts administer the personal affairs of Muslims, while civil courts govern Hindus, Christians, Buddhists and other religious minorities.

The Islamic sharia courts operate in parallel to civil courts here but apply specifically to Muslims. According to Reuters: “Islamic courts have authority over the country's Muslims. Islamic law is selectively enforced by local officials in each of Malaysia's 13 federal states. In some states unmarried Muslim couples caught in hotel rooms can be charged, while believers seen eating in the daytime during the fasting month of Ramadan can be fined. Kelantan state, run by an Islamist party, has separate-sex supermarket queues, but the national capital, Kuala Lumpur, is more relaxed. Yet many say Malaysia's secular status is being eroded. Many non-Muslims worry about Islamic law being eimposed on them. [Source: Reuters, June 28, 2006]

An opinion poll in 2023 from a reputable US firm found that 86 percent of Muslims in Malaysia would support replacing the secular legal system with Islamic law. Support for Islamist politics has surged in recent elections, giving hardline groups a significant foothold in parts of the country. In the 2023 state elections, a coalition of Islamist parties known as PN (“Perikatan Nasional”) won almost two thirds of the 245 seats contested.

In the 1990s, Pan-Malaysia Islamic Party (PAS)—an Islamic political party—said it wanted to bring back stoning and amputations and the death penalty for apostasy. Thus far the Malaysia federal government and Parliament have vetoed their efforts. When Abdul had Awang because chief minister of the Malaysian state of Terengganu in 1999 and tried tied impose the punishments of stoning to death for adulterers and amputation for thieves, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad invoked Malaysia’s secular constitution to stop him.

Impact of Malaysia's Islamic Law on Non-Muslims

In December 2007, the Associated Press reported that a ruling by Malaysia’s highest court in a high-profile marital dispute could determine whether Islamic Shariah courts had the authority to decide matters involving non-Muslims. The case centered on Subashini Rajasingam, a 29-year-old ethnic Indian Hindu woman who sought to stop her husband, a Muslim convert, from pursuing a divorce in a Shariah court and from converting their younger son to Islam. Although Subashini did not oppose the divorce itself, she argued that it should be handled by the civil courts because the marriage had been conducted under non-Muslim law. Her lawyer, K. Shanmuga, maintained that the issue was not a challenge to the authority of Shariah courts, but rather a question of jurisdiction in disputes involving a non-Muslim spouse. [Source: AP, December 26, 2007]

The case quickly became a major legal and social issue in Malaysia because it exposed tensions between the country’s civil and Shariah legal systems. Minority religious groups, including Buddhists, Christians, and Hindus, feared that the courts were increasingly favoring Islamic authority at the expense of constitutional protections for religious freedom and equality. Human rights advocates warned that the outcome could influence future cases involving interfaith marriages, custody disputes, and the right of a parent to convert children without the consent of the other parent.

Subashini had married Saravanan Thangathoray in a Hindu ceremony in 2002, and the couple had two sons. In 2006, Saravanan converted to Islam, adopted the name Muhammad Shafi Saravanan Abdullah, and filed for divorce and custody in a Shariah court. He also claimed to have converted one child to Islam and sought permission to convert the other. Subashini turned to the civil courts for divorce, custody, and an order preventing her husband from using the Shariah court system, but both the High Court and Court of Appeal ruled against her. In a 2–1 decision, the Federal Court later dismissed her application on technical grounds related to the timing of her divorce filing under the Law Reform (Marriage and Divorce) Act 1976. However, the court also ruled that the word “parent” in Article 12(4) of the Federal Constitution could refer to a single parent, effectively allowing either mother or father to decide a child’s religion. Critics argued that this interpretation undermined equal parental rights and opened the door to unilateral religious conversions in interfaith family disputes.

Blasphemy Laws in Malaysia

Chapter XV of the Malaysian Penal Code sets out “offenses relating to religion.” The offenses include “injuring or defiling a place of worship with intent to insult the religion of any class” (punishable by up to two years of imprisonment or a fine, or both); “disturbing a religious assembly” (up one year of imprisonment or a fine or both); and “trespassing on burial places, etc” (up to one year of imprisonment or a fine or both). Section 298 contains the following offense: Uttering words, etc., with deliberate intent to wound the religious feelings of any person 298. Whoever, with deliberate intention of wounding the religious feelings of any person, utters any word or makes any sound in the hearing of that person, or makes any gesture in the sight of that person, or places any object in the sight of that person, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with fine or with both. [Source: Library of Congress Law Library, Legal Reports , 2017]

In addition, section 298A is a detailed provision that criminalizes “causing, etc., disharmony, or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will, or prejudicing, etc., the maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion.” This is punishable by between two and five years of imprisonment. The provision defines aspects of the offense, and also states that “[i]t shall not be a defence to any charge under this section to assert that what the offender is charged with doing was done in any honest belief in, or in any honest interpretation of, any precept, tenet or teaching of any religion.”

Keningau, Sabah: Shari'ah Court (Mahkamah Syariah Keningau

Furthermore, the Sedition Act 1948 was amended in 2015 to include in the definition of “seditious tendency” a tendency “to promote feelings of ill will, hostility or hatred between persons or groups of persons on the ground of religion.” Under the Act, a person may be liable to a term of imprisonment of between three and seven years where he or she (a) does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do, any act which has or which would, if done, have a seditious tendency; (b) utters any seditious words; (c) prints, publishes or causes to be published, sells, offers for sale, distributes or reproduces any seditious publication; or (d) propagates any seditious publication. |*|

In addition, federal and state laws that set out Syariah (Shari‘a) criminal offenses (applicable only to Muslims) contain provisions related to, among others, wrongful worship; teaching false doctrines; propagating religious beliefs and doctrines other than those of Islam among persons professing the Islamic faith; claiming that a person is a prophet or knows of unnatural happenings; insulting or bringing into contempt the religion of Islam; and deriding, insulting, ridiculing or bringing into contempt verses of the Quran. These laws have been used to charge Muslims with blasphemy offenses for certain actions, such as a 2015 case in Perak involving a Muslim man who sought clarification from religious teachers and others regarding the history of the practice of declaring faith. |*|

The US Department of State has reported on the application of the above laws in its annual reports on international religious freedom. For example, the 2015 report stated that [t]he government continued to forbid non-Sunni practice of Islam, barred Muslims from converting to another religion, and imposed fines, detentions, and canings on those classified under the law as Muslim who contravened sharia codes. It also limited proselytization by non-Muslim religious groups and restricted the distribution of religious texts. The government prosecuted some deemed to have “insulted Islam” under sedition laws, often following criticism of the government’s policies on religion. Because Islam, Malay ethnic identity, and the ruling United Malays National Organization (UMNO) party are closely linked, it is difficult to categorize many incidents as being solely based on religious identity. |*|

Apostasy-Related Cases in Malaysia

In Malaysia, Muslims are not allowed to formally renounce Islam — apostasy — and apostates are sent for counseling and, ultimately, fined or jailed if they do not desist. Lina Joy, a Muslim by birth who converted to Christianity, lost a six-year battle to have the word "Islam" removed from her identity card.

In 1999, a Malaysian woman reported that she was detained shortly after formally declaring her conversion from Islam to Christianity. Five days after registering her change of religion, officers from a state Islamic department came to her workplace and took her into custody. She said she was then held at a rehabilitation facility, where a religious instructor attempted to persuade her to return to Islam. During her detention, she stated that she was subjected to physical punishment, including caning. The woman, who was 21 at the time and requested anonymity, said she remained at the facility for about two months. She later escaped after finding an unlocked exit. Reflecting on the experience, she said authorities should not determine an individual’s beliefs. Her account was cited in discussions about how religious conversion is handled in Malaysia. [Source: Sebastian Tong, Reuters, June 25, 2006]

Ian Buruma wrote in The New Yorker, There is the “case of a young Malay woman who no longer believed in Islam and wanted to marry a Christian. To do so, she would have to change her religious status. The secular authorities ruled that this was a matter for the Islamic court, but, of course, no Islamic court (whose authority she, as a non-believer, no longer recognised) would ever accede to apostasy. Her predicament has become a test case on the issue of Malay identity. After receiving death threats, she is now in hiding. Anwar rolled his eyes. “Islamically, it is indefensible that all Malays should have to be Muslims,” he told me. “Not all Arabs are Muslims, after all. But this case has become too political. It is better not to dwell on this issue. We should deal with poverty, rule of law, democracy. . . .” I must have looked unsatisfied. “Look,” he said, “I have Malay friends who no longer believe, who drink. But they don’t make an issue out of it.” [Source: Ian Buruma, The New Yorker, May 19, 2009]

In March 2009, an ethnic Chinese Malaysian went to court to fight the secret conversion of his 15-month-old daughter by his estranged Muslim convert wife. AFP reported: “Carpenter Hoo Ying Soon, 28, is also challenging the temporary custody granted to his wife by a sharia court. Lawyer Tang Jay Son told AFP Hoo only learned of his wife and child's secret conversion two days ago through a sharia court notice, which said the woman had become a Muslim on January 28 and his infant daughter on February 3. "They also served him an interim court order... that grants the wife a temporary custody over the child and the reason for that is because the child is already a Muslim," Tang said. "But we have to bear in mind

Taleban Lite in Malaysia

Nick Meo wrote in The Times, “In a sign of their clout, the American pop diva Gwen Stefani has agreed to wear traditional costumes in her Malaysian concert next week after conservative Muslim youths protested at the “indecent dressing and obscenity” of her skin-baring act. An Islamic opposition party demanded that her show should be cancelled. The platinum blonde star has agreed to cover up in the hope of heading off further protests.[Source: Nick Meo, The Times, August 18, 2007 +]

“Older Malays bemoan a younger generation that has become puritanical, self-righteously declining to attend social functions where alcohol is served. Headscarves, rare 20 years ago, are worn by almost all Malay women now, although often in combination with tight jeans. Islam has always had a prominent place. It is the official religion of Malaysia and the Constitution states that anyone born Malay is Muslim. +

“The debate over the parameters of its role, an old argument in Malaysia, was given a new outing when Najib Razak, the Deputy Prime Minister, broke a taboo to declare that the nation was an Islamic one. He said: “We have never been secular because being secular by Western definition means separation of the Islamic principles in the way we govern the country.” The Council of Churches of Malaysia afterwards accused him of stirring up racial tension. +

Taleban Lite in Kelantan

Nick Meo wrote in The Times, “Over a drink of green coconut at what used to be called the Passionate Love Beach until his Islamist party came to power and scrapped the name, state minister Takiyuddin Hassan outlines the victories in the war on sin. Mr Hassan’s party boasts a different set of achievements: banning mini-skirts, chastising unmarried couples and renaming Kota Bharu’s favourite beauty spot. They also closed down nightclubs, banned nearly all bars except a few Chinese restaurants, where no Muslims are allowed, and refused to let a proposed cinema open unless there were separate sections for men and women. [Source: Nick Meo, The Times, August 18, 2007]

“As for Mr Hassan, a moderate who was once a lawyer, he is proud of his party’s achievements in Kota Bharu. He says that it has kept the rustic capital of Kelantan state upright and clean-living. The biggest building in the city is a gigantic headquarters decorated with concrete Korans where the moral enforcement department is based. Its bearded officials spend much of their time prowling parks in Kota Bharu in search of amorous young sinners.

“Mr Hassan is sensitive about the mocking nickname of “Taleban lite” sometimes levelled at his party from Kuala Lumpur, where bars do a roaring trade and the cinemas are full of dating couples. Yet he is sure that the moral example set in Kota Bharu will some day win over his lax compatriots to the south. “Malaysia is a Muslim state. We hope we can change the mindset of our people in Kuala Lumpur so they can live according to Islamic principles too,” he said. Not all parties agree.” +

Impact of Taleban Lite of Racial Relations in Malaysia

Nick Meo wrote in The Times, “Some fear that assertive Islam threatens to upset the delicate balance between the 60 percent Malay Muslim majority and the nonMuslim ethnic Chinese and Indian minorities, which have managed to coexist, sometimes uneasily, since the troubled birth of the country in 1957, at a time of civil war and ethnic tension. At the time many feared that the new nation was doomed to failure. It has instead built a strong economy and an imperfect democracy, dominated for 50 years by the United Malays National Organisation, which has survived without the coups or upheavals that have plagued her neighbours. [Source: Nick Meo, The Times, August 18, 2007 +]

Ronnie Liu, of the Democratic Action Party, said: “Socialising between Malays and the other ethnic groups is much rarer than it used to be. You go into coffee shops and restaurants now and they no longer cater to an ethnic mix of customers. It wasn’t like that before.” Some nonMuslim Chinese and Indians feel increasingly treated like second-class citizens. They complain, usually privately, that Islamic religious schools are much better funded than theirs and that a system of affirmative action favours Malays when it comes to university places. +

“Minority religions are particularly worried about a series of apostasy rulings. Chinese or Indians who want to marry a Malay must convert to Islam, causing great problems if they divorce or are widowed and want to return to the religion of their birth. In a notorious case this year a Malay woman called Lina Joy attempted to have Malaysia’s courts recognise her conversion to Christianity, but failed and was hounded and fled into hiding. Some hardliners have even called for the execution of apostates.”

Religious Police in Malaysia

Malaysia has religious police known as the Jawi. They routinely arrest Muslims for drinking alcohol, kissing in public, gambling, insulting Islam, eating in public during Ramadan, practicing homosexuality and not praying enough. The laws only apply to Muslims. The police have the right to enter homes, bars and hotels and so forth without a warrant.

When the Jawi raid a bar they are coordinated enough to have all the exit and entrances staked out when the raid is conducted. The raids are often conducted in party areas like Penang, in some cases on holidays like Valentine’s day. If men are caught with beer their mugs are placed in plastic bags like bullets from a murder case.

The Los Angeles Times described a 4:00am raid on a hotel in Georgetown, one of the more liberal parts of the country. The police had no warrant and announced that they were ‘Housekeeping” and burst in the room. Inside was a Muslim man and a Hindu man. The woman was set free because it was deemed that she was a Hindu but the man was charged with being in a room alone with a woman, a crime under Sharia law punishable by two years in prison and fines of $790.

Nick Meo wrote in The Times, “Every state has a religious department with Saudi-style moral enforcers and nowhere are they more active than in Kota Bharu, a city of mosques along a muddy river that bustles during the day but falls silent at nightfall. Unmarried couples found sharing hotel rooms are hunted down by the enforcers. Couples caught sitting too close together on park benches are fined 2,000 ringgit (£285) in the city’s shariah court under a provision called khalwat ” loosely translated as “close proximity”. Couples have been forced into marriage after being caught together and moral enforcers sometimes pick on foreigners. [Source: Nick Meo, The Times, August 18, 2007 +]

“NonMuslims as well as Malays also sometimes fall foul of the enforcers in Kuala Lumpur and elsewhere and there are claims that instead of being paragons of Islamic virtue the enforcers are prone to bribery and have recruited vigilantes into their ranks. In Kota Bharu the enforcers declined to speak to The Times. Mr Hassan explained: “They are worried about being made to look like fools. It could damage the image of Islam if their work is portrayed in the wrong light.” +

“Nurhayati Kaprawi, of Sisters in Islam, a group that has spoken out against khalwatand the enforcers, said that many of their raids followed anonymous tip-offs. She said that they frequently terrorised people by barging into homes in the middle of the night. Ms Kaprawi said: “They say they want to implement Islam but the truth is they are really smearing Islam. If they are not stopped they really could become like the Taleban.” +

Kuala Lumpur’s Morality Squad

January 2006, it was announced that Islamic religious authorities had formed a team of volunteers to patrol Putrajaya, the administrative capital of Malaysia, to prevent "indecent behavior" among Muslims. Associated Press reported: “A 75-member Islamic Council Volunteer Squad will be on the lookout for offenders - such as Muslim couples holding hands in public - in Putrajaya, just south of the largest city, Kuala Lumpur, said Che Mat Che Ali, director of the Federal Territory Islamic Department. "Their role is to prevent indecent behavior," Che Mat told the New Straits Times newspaper. "We want them to approach people and advise them against creating social problems and committing sins like that." [Source: AP, January 19, 2006 **]

“A department spokeswoman, Zainab Mohamad, confirmed that the team began work Jan. 16. She stressed that the volunteers - members of Muslim community groups - were not empowered to arrest anyone. The volunteers, uniformed in blue vests and white caps, are expected to alert the department's enforcement officers if they spot offenders while patrolling Putrajaya's parks and other public areas. **

“Islamic department officials already inspect lovers' haunts and occasionally raid venues like discos. Islamic courts can charge suspects with various offenses that often carry prison terms and fines. Critics say the Islamic officers are overzealous and violate civil rights.” **

Syariah High Court Judge Charged with Taking Bribes

In November 2007, Associated Press reported: “A judge has become the first senior member of Malaysia's Islamic law system to face a corruption trial. He was charged with accepting bribes, a court official said. The authorities insisted it was an isolated incident that should not mar the reputation of Malaysia's Islamic law or Syariah Courts, which function separately from the secular legal system and handle family, personal and religious cases for the country's majority-Muslim population. [Source: AP, November 22, 2007]

Hassan Basri Markum, a Syariah High Court judge in the northern state of Perak, pleaded innocent on Tuesday in a civil court in Ipoh - which is under the secular judicial system - to five charges of soliciting or receiving about RM5,200 (S$2,200) in bribes, said his lawyer, Mr S. Theivanthiran. The government's Anti-Corruption Agency accused Hassan of demanding bribes between August and September this year in various syariah cases, including helping two couples marry without fulfilling Syariah requirements, Mr Theivanthiran said. If convicted, Hassan faces up to 20 years in prison.

Hassan, 53, has been working in the Syariah judicial system for more than 20 years. He is the first Syariah Court judge to face corruption charges, said his lawyer and a spokesman for the Syariah Judicial Department. Syariah Chief Judge Sheikh Ghazali Abdul Rahman told Malaysian media on Tuesday that any case of alleged misconduct involving Syariah judges is an isolated incident caused by an individual's personal weaknesses. 'We have an ethics code and directives for Syariah judges, lawyers and other officers,' Datuk Sheikh Ghazali said in the New Straits Times. 'Those who are proven guilty by the court of law will be punished accordingly.' The Syariah Judicial Department's spokesman confirmed Datuk Sheikh Ghazali's comments.

Jawi Accused of Mistreating Women

In January 2005, morality police known as the Jawi raided a nightclub along Jalan Ampang in Kuala Lumpur. About 100 Muslim youths, half of them women, were allegedly detained for several hours, placed into lock-ups and “treated in a high-handed manner.” The women, including a celebrity, claimed they were ogled at by the officers who also made derogatory comments about them.

Suhaini Aznam wrote in Star, “The raid by the Federal Territory Religious Department (Jawi) on a Kuala Lumpur nightclub has brought into focus this issue as well as the behaviour of officers involved. The mistreatment of the women detained by Jawi’s “morality policemen” has brought wide condemnation by many quarters including Muslim ministers. Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Sharizat Abdul Jaili proposed that women officers be in future raiding parties involving Muslim women. In this case, about half of the 100 people detained were women. Yet only two women officers were at the nightclub. [Source: Suhaini Aznam The Star, January 30, 2005]

The basic question is, as always, who gave the guardians of morality the right to be our guardians? In cases of adultery, Islam requires that four men of unimpeachable character must witness the act for themselves to be able to testify. In this case, the Jawi officers seemed to have exercised their duties with undue zeal. The raiding party members were said to have spoken harshly to the women. At the nightclub, they were made to sit on the floor. At the lockup, they were not allowed to go to the toilet. So in desperation, one reportedly relieved herself in full view of everyone else.

Why did Jawi raid the nightclub in the first place? It is the police who check for drugs and prostitution. Jawi presumably was looking out for inappropriate dress and close proximity among young men and women, albeit in full view of the public. And the sale and consumption of liquor, of course.

The alleged mistreatment of women during a raid by the Jawi should not have occurred since the syariah law has more stringent provisions on dealing with women, said Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Radzi Sheikh Ahmad. “Islam has a lot of respect for women. The provisions on women should be more stringent, and good etiquette, good manners and courtesy towards women are expected. “So, it was a surprise (the alleged misconduct of the Jawi officers),” said Radzi, who is the minister in charge of law.

Radzi said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi had expressed concern when the matter was discussed in the last Cabinet meeting. “He said the officers had acted in an un-Islamic manner,” he added. Radzi said Abdullah had then directed the Attorney-General to ascertain if the religious authorities had the power to detain The other bone of contention is the quality of the Jawi officers themselves. It was widely reported that the men are alleged to have taken advantage of the women’s embarrassment over their predicament, fears of male Muslim authority and lack of knowledge of their rights. Some women were even kept in lockups for up to 10 hours before they were released. In that time, they were humiliated by being ogled at, and were made to parade for the officers so that photographs could be taken of their “improper attire”. people. He added that the other question was the absence of female officers during the raid and also examination of the women. He added that civil law required the presence of female officers during such raids and it should also be a requirement in syariah law. “If there is no such provision, then it has to be made. It is only logical,” he added.

Image Sources: Wikimedia Commons

Text Sources: New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Times of London, Lonely Planet Guides, Library of Congress, Malaysia Tourism Promotion Board, Compton’s Encyclopedia, The Guardian, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, The New Yorker, Time, Newsweek, Reuters, AP, AFP, Wall Street Journal, The Atlantic Monthly, The Economist, Foreign Policy, Wikipedia, BBC, CNN, and various books, websites and other publications.

Last updated May 2026