Conflict of jurisdiction between Civil and Syariah Court in apostasy and conversion case: Position under Malaysian constitutional law

Abstract

This paper examines the conflict of jurisdiction between the Civil and Syariah Courts in Malaysia, specifically in matters relating to apostasy and religious conversion, and analyzes its position under the Malaysian constitutional framework. The dual legal system in Malaysia, comprising civil law and Islamic law, creates a complex interplay when it comes to issues involving personal status, particularly in cases where an individual seeks to renounce Islam or convert into or out of the religion. The Federal Constitution, while declaring Islam as the religion of the Federation, also guarantees the right to freedom of religion under Article 11. However, jurisdictional ambiguity arises due to the division of legislative powers between the Federal and State governments, and the exclusive jurisdiction granted to Syariah Courts on matters pertaining to Islamic law. Using a library-based methodology, this paper explores landmark judicial decisions, legislative provisions, and constitutional principles to uncover the root causes of these jurisdictional disputes. It also evaluates the implications of such conflicts on individual rights, legal certainty, and religious freedom. In conclusion, the paper proposes potential legal and institutional reforms to harmonize the jurisdictional boundaries and uphold constitutional supremacy while respecting religious sensitivities in Malaysia’s plural legal landscape.