Keputusan kes Nik Elin bukan lemahkan Mahkamah Syariah, kata Tengku Maimun

Bekas ketua hakim negara Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat has defended the recent decision made in the case of former lawyer Nik Elin Zurina Nik Abdul Rashid, stating it was not intended to undermine the sanctity of Islam or weaken the status of the Syariah Court. In fact, he clarified that the ruling was based on the principle of challenging negligence, where the State Assembly of Kelantan was found to have overstepped its jurisdiction by enacting a general criminal law, which, according to the Constitution, falls exclusively under the purview of Parliament.

He emphasized that the court's role is to judge and clarify the limits of power, as allowing abuse of power would mean accepting violations of federalism and legislative anarchy, which could undermine the foundations of the nation. Tengku Maimun made these remarks during a seminar in Bangi, according to Berita Harian. In February 2024, the Federal Court ruled that 16 Sharia violations in the Kelantan General Penal Code (I) 2019 were invalid and ineffective.

The decision, delivered by a panel of nine judges with a 8-1 majority, also upheld two other technical flaws in the same code. The ruling has sparked various reactions, including allegations that it was politically motivated. However, Tengku Maimun insisted that the case was justified because the state administrative body had enacted a law it did not have the authority to create.

He stressed that maintaining the integrity of any institution, whether judicial or otherwise, demands a high price and requires immense moral courage. He added that a truly free individual must have a strong backbone and strong principles and will not bow down or compromise principles solely for the sake of popular opinion on social media or pressure from superiors.

In his effort to promote integrity, Tengku Maimun said that it requires a balance between words and action, a clear system of oversight, merit-based appointments, careful legislation, and strict enforcement without favoritism. He reiterated that trust is built through daily evidence and not mere slogans. In this context, leadership importance lies in setting an example and reminding everyone that the inner circle of an organization can undermine integrity by granting preferential treatment to certain groups, shielding wrongdoers, or ignoring external opinions.

From the perspective of personal integrity, it is most valuable when someone does what is right even when no one is watching.