The State Power to Restrict Religious Propagation: Assessing the Constitutional Validity of Section 5 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (State of Penang) Enactment 1996

Most states in Peninsular Malaysia restrict the propagation of non-Islamic doctrines among Muslims through freestanding enactments made under Article 11(4) of the Federal Constitution. Penang does not. Its restriction sits instead in Section 5 of the Syariah Criminal Offences (State of Penang) Enactment 1996, which reaches "any person, whether or not he professes the religion of Islam" and directs that the offence "may be tried in a Civil Court", although Item 1 of the State List confines Syariah criminal offences to Muslims. This article asks how far that hybrid provision is constitutionally valid when measured against the limits of Penang's legislative competence. It combines doctrinal analysis of the Constitution, the enactment and the case law following Iki Putra and Nik Elin with semi-structured interviews with a Syariah prosecuting officer in the state concerned and the legal adviser of another state, analysed thematically and triangulated against the statutory and case law. The informants agree that enforcement must run through the police, the Criminal Procedure Code and the civil courts, and neither knows of a single prosecution, yet they divide on validity. That division, the article argues, follows from the framework each applies, and neither the reach to non-Muslims nor the placement of the provision is decisive on its own, because Article 11(4) restricts propagation by reference to its Muslim recipients and the pith and substance test looks to purpose and effect rather than to the title of a statute. Section 5 is therefore better described as conditionally valid and judicially untested than as plainly void. The article offers a three-level framework separating legislative power, forum and procedure, and institutional implementation, and recommends a legislative audit before any repeal or transfer.

Article 11(4) Federal Constitution, state legislative competence, pith and substance, Syariah criminal offences, religious propagation

1. Bhat, P. I. (2019). Idea and methods of legal research. Oxford University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Che Jamaludin Mahmud, I. I., & Safiuddin, C. M. H. (2025). Exploring the legal framework of Islamic offences in Malaysia: A constitutional and judicial analysis. Borneo Akademika, 9(1), 111–136. https://doi.org/10.24191/BA/v9i1/118999 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Control of Islamic Religious Schools (Malacca) Enactment 2002 (Enactment No. 3 of 2002). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Dobinson, I., & Johns, F. (2007). Qualitative legal research. In M. McConville & W. H. Chui (Eds.), Research methods for law (pp. 16–45). Edinburgh University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Federal Constitution of Malaysia. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Hutchinson, T., & Duncan, N. (2012). Defining and describing what we do: Doctrinal legal research. Deakin Law Review, 17(1), 83–119. https://doi.org/10.21153/dlr2012vol17no1art70 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Iki Putra bin Mubarrak v. Kerajaan Negeri Selangor & Anor [2021] 2 MLJ 323. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ismail, S. Z., & Mansor, M. S. (2026). Implikasi kes Nik Elin terhadap bidang kuasa dan kedudukan kesalahan jenayah syariah [The implications of the Nik Elin case for jurisdiction and the status of Syariah criminal offences]. Malaysian Journal of Syariah and Law, 14(1), 278–296. https://doi.org/10.33102/mjsl.vol14no1.1026 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Leeuw, F. L., & Schmeets, H. (2016). Empirical legal research: A guidance book for lawyers, legislators and regulators. Edward Elgar Publishing. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Mohamed Adil, M. A., Wan Mansor, W. N., & Mohd Amin, A. (2023). The right to freedom of religion and jurisdictional conflicts in Malaysia. SINERGI: Journal of Strategic Studies & International Affairs, 3(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.17576/sinergi.0301.2023.06 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Mohd Kusrin, Z., Nasohah, Z., Samuri, M. A., & Mat Zain, M. N. (2013). Legal provisions and restrictions on the propagation of non-Islamic religions among Muslims in Malaysia. Kajian Malaysia, 31(2), 1–18. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Nik Elin Zurina bt Nik Abdul Rashid & Anor v. Kerajaan Negeri Kelantan [2024] 2 MLJ 150. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Public Prosecutor v. Krishnan a/l Muthu (Pahang Magistrates’ Court Case No. MA-83-146-2002). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Sabirin, N. A. M., Shariff, A. A. M., & Yahya, M. A. (2024). Penggubalan undang-undang jenayah syariah di Malaysia: Analisis ke atas kekaburan bidang kuasa parlimen dan dewan undangan negeri [The enactment of Syariah criminal law in Malaysia: An analysis of uncertainty over the legislative competence of Parliament and State Legislative Assemblies]. Akademika, 94(2), 346–360. https://doi.org/10.17576/akad-2024-9402-20 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Subordinate Courts Act 1948 (Act 92). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Sulaiman bin Takrib v. Kerajaan Negeri Terengganu [2009] 6 MLJ 354. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Syariah Criminal Code (I) Enactment 2019 (Kelantan). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Syariah Criminal Offences (State of Penang) Enactment 1996 (Enactment No. 3 of 1996). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Yahya, Z., & Samuri, M. A. A. (2019). Punca kuasa dan bidang kuasa Pegawai Penguatkuasa Agama Islam berkaitan Enakmen Kawalan Pengembangan Agama Bukan Islam kepada orang Islam di Malaysia [The legal basis and scope of powers of Islamic Religious Enforcement Officers under enactments controlling the propagation of non-Islamic religions among Muslims in Malaysia]. UMRAN – International Journal of Islamic and Civilizational Studies, 6(1), 79–101. https://doi.org/10.11113/umran2019.6n1.257 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Conflict of Law in the Safeguarding of Malaysian Intangible Cultural Heritage: A Way Forward
• Alternative Dispute Resolution in India: A Brief Overview Justice Delayed is Justice Denied. - William E. Gladstone
• The Role of Museums in Safeguarding Cultural Heritage Rights: Balancing Access and Repatriation
• An Evaluation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights' Significance and Application in Nigeria
• The Role of International Law in Shaping National Immigration Policies.