Yahoo Malaysia Web Search

Search results

  1. MAMAT BIN DAUD & ORS V GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA [1988] 1 M.L. 119 MATERIAL FACTS. The petitioners in this case were each charged under section 298A of the Penal Code for allegedly conducting an act which was likely to cause for prejudice and disharmony among people professing the religion of Islam.

  2. 3 Apr 2021 · This case signifies a departure from the majority decision of the Supreme Court (now the Federal Court) in Mamat bin Daud v. Government of Malaysia, which struck down a provision of the Federal Penal Code and arguably overly-extended the states’ jurisdiction over Islamic offences.

  3. Mamat bin daud or whatEVR Facts of the case : Petitioners were charged with an offence under section 298A of the Penal Code for the prejudice unity among persons professing the Islamic religion. Petitioners were alleged to have been an unauthorised bilal, khatib and Imam without the appointment of the Terengganu Administration of Islamic Law ...

  4. 28 Dis 2020 · The issue in the case was whether the penal offences introduced by the new section 298A of the Penal Code by the Penal Code and Criminal Procedure Code (Amendment) Act 1983 are ultra vires Article 74 (1) of the Federal Constitution as being in excess of the legislative power of Parliament. Held :

  5. MAMAT BIN DAUD & ORS v GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA, [1988] 1 MLJ 119 - Free download as PDF File (.pdf) or read online for free.

  6. 11 Dis 2000 · On May 13, 1983, Mamat Daud and two others allegedly committed a federal crime. They acted as unauthorised bilal, khatib and imam at a Friday prayer at Kampong Kenanga, Wakaf Tapai in Kuala...

  7. Daud bin Mamat v Majlis Agama Islam (Suriyadi J) Diputuskan, menolak saman-saman pemula tersebut dengan kos: (1) Plaintif-plaintif kekurangan ‘kekilanan’ yang sebenar di mana ditemui pada permohonan-permohonan deklarasi tersebut.