Syed Iskandar bin Syed Jaafar v Kerajaan Malaysia & Ors

Appellant(s): Syed Iskandar Bin Syed Jaafar

Respondent(s):

• Kerajaan Malaysia
• Ridha Abdah Bin Subri
• Malcolm Fernandez
• Mohd Khairul Azam Bin Abdul Aziz
• Nazira Bt Abdul Rahim
• Centre For A Bettet Tomorrow
• Dato' Seri Utama Hj Mukhriz Tun Dr. Mahathir
• Tun Dr. Mahathir Bin Mohamad
• Datuk Dr. Shahruddin Bin Md Salleh
• Dato' Wira Haji Amiruddin Bin Hj Hamzah
• Datuk Wira Marzuki Bin Yahya

Pihak Ketiga: Malaysian Bar

• YA Datuk Supang Lian
• YA Dato' Collin Lawrence Sequerah
• YA Dato Alwi Bin Abdul Wahab

• The appellant initiated an Originating Summons following the initial refusal of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to declare a state of emergency in October 2020 despite the advice of the then Prime Minister.
• The appellant sought a declaration that Act A514, which amended Article 150 of the Federal Constitution by adding clauses (8) and (9), is unconstitutional for violating the basic structure of the Federal Constitution by ousting the jurisdiction of the Courts.
• Although the subsequent declaration and expiration of a state of emergency rendered the initial dispute academic, the Court exercised its discretion to hear the appeal under the "Salem Exception" due to the significant public interest and the discrete points of constitutional law involved.

• Whether the ouster clauses in Article 150(8) and (9) of the Federal Constitution violate the Basic Structure Doctrine, specifically the principles of separation of powers and the independence of the Judiciary.
• Whether the satisfaction of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in proclaiming an emergency under Article 150 is justiciable or if it falls within a category of non-justiciable executive action due to national security considerations.
• Whether the United Kingdom Supreme Court's decision in the *Miller* case, regarding the justiciability of the prerogative power to prorogue Parliament, is applicable to the interpretation of emergency powers under Malaysia's written Constitution.

• The Court dismissed the appeal, holding that while the Basic Structure Doctrine is an intrinsic part of the Federal Constitution, certain "facets" of judicial power may be limited by the Constitution itself to accommodate the peculiar and extraordinary nature of emergency powers.
• The Court ruled that Article 150(8) is constitutional as the legislative history and the "original intent" of the framers indicate that matters of national security and the satisfaction of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong were intended to be non-justiciable, as the Executive is better equipped to handle sensitive information.
• The Court held that the *Miller* decision is inapplicable in Malaysia because the Malaysian legal system is governed by a written supreme Constitution rather than parliamentary sovereignty, and the scope of emergency powers is explicitly defined within the constitutional text.