The High Court in Kota Baru will decide on May 7 on a preliminary objection raised by the Kelantan state government to Gerakan's challenge to the constitutionality of its hudud enactment.

The law was passed by the state legislature two months ago.

The Kelantan government raised the objection citing Article 4(3) and 4(4) of the Federal Constitution where such declaratory challenge on a state law that goes against the Federal Constitution must obtain leave (permission) from the Federal Court, and also Article 128 that states such a proceeding should be made before the apex court.

Justice Azman Abdullah fixed the date after hearing submissions for more than two hours today.

Gerakan was represented by its deputy Youth chief, Andy Yong, and lawyers Jayanthi Balaguru, Raymond Leong, Chai Ko Thing and Ong Siang Liang.

They are mounting the challenge on the constittuonality of the hudud amendments, where it is argued the state law goes against the constitution.

The state government was led by its legal adviser, Shahidani Abd Aziz @ Juned, and Nooriah Osman.

Gerakan filed the legal challenge on March 18 , the same day of the tabling of the 1993 amendment, which was served on the state government on March 25 .  

The amendment was unanimously passed by the Kelantan state legislature on March 19, with the opposition Umno assemblyperson agreeing to it as well.

The stand taken by Umno goes against the views of BN components parties MCA, MIC Gerakan and also of several Sabah and Sarawak state parties, which object to hudud.

Former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram ( left ) is acting as a consultant in the application filed by Gerakan.

Initially, today was fixed for submissions for the constitutional question to be referred to the Federal Court.

Gerakan wants to refer the question on the constitutionality of hudud as a state law, and under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act, to refer a constitutional matter to the Federal Court which is eventually a constitutional court.

Under Section 84 of the Act, questions on constitutional matters can be referred directly to the Federal Court, the highest court in the country, such as in this matter on the determination of the constitutionality of hudud.

Issue: Can state law can bypass constitution?

The issue concerns whether the implementation of a state law can bypass the constitution and federal laws.

Gerakan president Mah Siew Keong ( left ), in a statement today, questioned PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang’s move to table a Private Member’s Bill in Parliament to amend the Syariah Court (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965, or Act 355, to pave way for hudud to be implemented in Kelantan .

Mah said the five lawyers, who are Gerakan members, have the blessing of the party's central committee to challenge the constitutionality of the state law, and this shows the solidarity of the multiracial party in defending the integrity of the constitution against being besieged by hudud.

“It is our fervent hope to seek a permanent solution to this hudud issue. We believe we are right in resorting to legal avenues,” he said.

Gerakan has the utmost respect for Islam as religion of the Federation, but the hudud move of PAS is unconstitutional and it can never be applied in a diverse society such as Malaysia, Mah added.