‘Deviant’ or not? Sisters in Islam awaits Federal Court verdict today on Selangor fatwa

KUALA LUMPUR, June 19 — Muslim women’s rights group Sisters in Islam (SIS) will find out today whether it will remain labelled “deviant” in Selangor, and whether its publications risk seizure or its website could be blocked.

For more than 10 years, SIS has been challenging a Selangor fatwa which labels it as deviant, and this court battle will finally come to an end today at the Federal Court.

The Federal Court’s five-judge panel, chaired by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, is expected to deliver its decision this morning on whether the Selangor fatwa is valid and applies to SIS.

Here’s a quick guide to all you need to know ahead of today’s upcoming decision:

1. What is SIS?

SIS, founded in 1988 and which operates through the company SIS Forum (Malaysia), is known for pushing for law reforms and promoting women’s rights.

It has also been giving free legal advice to Muslims in Malaysia on their legal rights under Islamic family law and local laws on Shariah criminal offences.

2. What does the Selangor fatwa against SIS say?

On July 31, 2014, the Selangor state government gazetted a fatwa which declared SIS Forum (Malaysia) and any individual, organisation or institution who hold on to “liberalism and religious pluralism” as “deviants” from Islamic teachings.

The fatwa also says:

• Any publications with elements of liberalism and religious pluralism should be banned and can be seized.
• The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) is to block social websites that go against Islamic teachings and hukum syarak (Islamic law).
• Any individuals holding on to liberalism and religious pluralism should repent and return to Islam.

Since the fatwa or religious edict was gazetted, it became legally-binding in Selangor.

3. What did SIS want in its constitutional challenge?

On October 31, 2014, SIS Forum (Malaysia) filed for judicial review in the civil courts to challenge the constitutionality and legality of the Selangor fatwa.

The court challenge named three respondents: the Selangor Fatwa Committee, the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (Mais) and the Selangor state government.

In short, here are the court orders that SIS Forum (Malaysia) wanted the High Court to make:

• to declare the state’s fatwa goes against federal laws (Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984’s Section 7 and the Communications and Multimedia Act’s Section 3) and the Federal Constitution (Article 5, 8, 10, 11)
• to declare that the fatwa cannot apply on SIS Forum as it is a company, and as the Selangor Islamic authorities only have jurisdiction over individuals professing the religion of Islam
• to quash or cancel the fatwa.

4. What did the High Court and Court of Appeal say?

On August 27, 2019, the High Court dismissed SIS Forum’s fatwa challenge as it ruled that the civil courts have no jurisdiction to hear the case, and that the Shariah courts should be the one to hear and decide it.

The High Court also said the fatwa did not go against federal laws and the Federal Constitution, and that the fatwa applies to SIS Forum even though it is a company as its directors are Muslim.

On March 14, 2023, the Court of Appeal in a 2-1 decision also dismissed SIS Forum’s fatwa challenge, with the majority agreeing with the High Court.

Following those court rulings, SIS Forum appealed to the Federal Court.

5. What the Federal Court was asked to decide today

Over two days of hearings on December 2, 2024 and on March 12, 2025, the Federal Court was asked to consider 10 complex questions about the Federal Constitution and other laws.

Some of the key issues covered by these questions are whether fatwas that are gazetted would become subsidiary laws, and whether the civil courts would then have the power to review the constitutionality and legality of gazetted fatwas.

Other issues covered are the procedures that the Selangor fatwa committee should follow under a 2003 Selangor state law when making fatwas, such as whether it should have given SIS the opportunity to be heard first, and if the making of such fatwas cannot restrict or prohibit the constitutionally-guaranteed right of freedom of expression.

Other key issues are on whether companies can be treated as persons professing the religion of Islam, and whether the Selangor Fatwa Committee has the power to include directives — such as to ban publications and to block websites — to the federal government or the state government when making fatwas.

In short, the Federal Court was asked to consider if fatwas can apply to companies like SIS Forum, and if Selangor had followed procedures in making this fatwa and if the fatwa goes against constitutional rights such as equality, freedom of expression, freedom of religion.

6. What about that other Federal Court decision? And what is Section 66A about?

Just months after SIS started its judicial review case in the civil courts to challenge the fatwa, Selangor amended a state law to introduce Section 66A to give Selangor’s Shariah courts the power to carry out judicial reviews.

The High Court in August 2019 had actually mentioned Section 66A as enabling SIS to apply for a judicial review of the fatwa in the Shariah courts, while also ruling that it is the Shariah courts that have the power to review the Selangor fatwa against SIS.

SIS then filed a separate court case at the Federal Court to challenge Section 66A.

On February 21, 2022, the Federal Court declared Section 66A as invalid and unconstitutional as it said Selangor does not have the powers to make the law to give judicial review powers to Shariah courts, and also made it clear that only civil courts have judicial review powers.

SIS’s fatwa challenge then continued on, and its lawyers have also relied on the Federal Court’s 2022 decision to say that civil courts have the power to review fatwas based on constitutional matters and that companies cannot profess a religion.

7. Why is the SIS court challenge important?

Today, the Federal Court will have a chance to make clear whether state religious authorities can apply fatwas on companies, and also the scope of powers and role played by state religious authorities as well as the procedures required, among other things.

In a list of Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ) provided to the media earlier this week, SIS explained that it filed the judicial review “not to challenge Islam”, but to defend its constitutional rights as a civil organisation and to uphold justice in line with Islamic values.

“This case is not simply about a single fatwa or one organisation — it is a landmark test of constitutional boundaries affecting the rule of law in Malaysia,” SIS explained in its compilation of information about the case.