Four Indonesians have filed a judicial review application to seek leave from the High Court in Kuala Lumpur to set aside the charge that they are followers of Zubir Amir, whom they purportedly identified as Imam Mahdi.

The four were charged in the Kuala Lumpur Syariah Court last year.

Imam Mahdi is the messiah prophesied to come at the time of the last judgment, to save mankind and the world.

Rahmat Abdullah Makki Almalik, Kharmain, Cut Wardah and Ismelda Harfianti Lubis named, among others, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom and the Malaysian government as respondents.

However, senior federal counsel Shamsul Bolhaasan from the Attorney-General's Chambers made a preliminary objection to their application, which was filed last month.

“The matter should be heard in the syariah court and not the civil court,” Shamsul said when met.

Justice Hanipah Farikulah has fixed Jan 27 to hear both the objection and leave.

All four of them are charged under Section 6(a) of the Federal Territory Syariah Criminal offences with making a false claim of declaring another person as a prophet, Imam Mahdi or wali at the Jawi prosecution office.

The four who are between 38 and 55 years old, are seeking for leave for a certiorari order (to quash) the detention, arrest and charge by the syariah chief prosecutor, damages for wrongful prosecution assessed by the court, and other relief deemed fit by the court.

The grounds for their relief include that the respondents acted wrongly in arresting and detaining them after meeting the FT mufti.

They further claimed that the syarie chief prosecutor and the senior prosecutor were wrong in charging them to declare Zubir as Imam Mahdi and that Jawi was wrong in not providing an Indonesian translator during investigation and that the charge that they face is incorrect and they are wrongfully prosecuted.

They further claimed that Jamil had failed in his responsibility to intervene in the arrest and wrongful detention, and intervene in preventing the charge.

All four further claimed that the actions of all respondents were illogical, irrational and irresponsible.