PUTRAJAYA, Feb 23 — The Court of Appeal today dismissed freelance preacher Ahmad Dusuki Abd Rani’s appeal to reinstate his Tauliah Mengajar (Islamic teaching certification).
A three-member panel led by Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan unanimously clarified that the appeal concerned only the Shah Alam High Court’s refusal to grant additional remedies.
The High Court had previously allowed Dusuki’s judicial review application and issued a certiorari quashing the Selangor Islamic Religious Council (MAIS) decision of March 10, 2022, which had revoked his certification.
"There is no cross-appeal by the respondent (MAIS). The grant of certiorari, therefore, remains unchallenged. The sole issue before this court is whether the learned High Court judge erred in refusing to grant declaratory relief, mandamus, and damages.
"The reliefs sought are discretionary in nature. It is settled law that an appellate court will not interfere with the exercise of discretion unless it is shown that the court below acted on a wrong principle, failed to consider relevant matters, or that the decision is plainly wrong," he said.
The other two judges on the panel were Justices Datuk Alwi Abdul Wahab and Datin Paduka Evrol Mariette Peters.
Justice Zaini added that the panel would first consider the declaration sought by Dusuki, namely that the respondents’ decision to revoke his Tauliah Mengajar effective March 3, 2022, was null and void.
He said the High Court had granted certiorari, nullifying the revocation decision ab initio, making any further declaration that it is “null and void” redundant. Justice Zaini held that declaratory relief must serve a purpose and agreed with the trial judge’s decision to refuse a needless declaration.
The judge noted that the second issue was the order of mandamus to reinstate the appellant’s Tauliah Mengajar.
"The Tauliah expired on June 30, 2023, by effluxion of time, and the High Court’s decision was delivered after it had expired. The appellant has not identified any statutory provision imposing a mandatory duty on the respondents to reinstate an expired Tauliah.
"The refusal of mandamus was therefore correct," he said.
Regarding the appellant’s request to extend the Tauliah Mengajar without a new application, Justice Zaini said the court viewed such relief as effectively circumventing the regulatory framework governing its issuance.
"We accept the respondents’ contention that the revocation letter issued to the appellant did not state that it was due to his involvement in politics. It is, in our opinion, a speculative move on the part of the appellant.
"In any event, we agree that the respondent was entitled to set such a regulation under Section 118 of the Administration of the Religion of Islam (State of Selangor) Enactment 2003," he said.
Regarding damages, Justice Zaini noted that it is well established that a public law violation does not automatically confer a right to compensation.
"An applicant must establish an independent cause of action recognised in private law before damages may be awarded. The appellant neither pleaded nor proved any such actionable cause recognised in private law.
"We therefore find no error warranting appellate interference. The appeal is therefore dismissed with costs of RM35,000," he said.
Dusuki was represented by lawyers Ashok K. Raman Nair and Mohd Jamil Yaacob, while Arham Rahimy Hariri appeared for MAIS.
