PETALING JAYA: The director and producer of local film Mentega Terbang will face trial in court, following the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s dismissal of their application to refer Constitutional questions on their charges of wounding religious feelings.
Judge K. Muniandy said the court found that the application by ‘Mentega Terbang’ director Mohd Khairianwar Jailani and producer Tan Meng Kheng to judicially repeal Section 298 of the Penal Code “lacked basis”, as quoted by the New Straits Times.
The charge under Section 298 allots a jail sentence of up to a year or a fine or both.
He added that Section 298 is a law dating back to pre-independence according to Article 160(2) of the Constitution and said it will continue to take effect.
ALSO READ: Court rejects judicial review bid against “Mentega Terbang” ban
“Thus, this court also finds that there is no question of Constitutional issue on the matters referred to this court by the magistrate’s court necessary for the determination of the criminal proceedings instituted at the magistrate’s court.
“Section 298 is found to be valid and Constitutional and to remain in force pursuant to Article 162 of the Federal Constitution.
“Ensuing from that, application by the applicant is thus dismissed. As such, the criminal case is now remitted back to the magistrate court for trial,“ he was quoted as saying.
Muniandy also pointed out that the referred questions are if Section 298 breaches Article 10(1)(a) of the Constitution when it comes to freedom of speech and expression, making it void and unconstitutional.
The director and producer also questioned if the sentence “wounding the religious feelings of any person”, as quoted, is vague, thus infringing Articles 5 and 8 of the Constitution and impinge on the right to fair trial for the accused.
ALSO READ: Mentega Terbang director fails to get leave to appeal, gag order stays
The filmmakers also contended that Section 298 is not closely related to public order as wounding religious feelings does not fall within the restriction in Article 10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution.
The pair also argues that the charges do not deal with words or objects for their manner, violence to endanger the peace and the deprivation of public morality to incite society and cause civil strife.
However, Muniandy said the parliament is entitled to legally restrict freedom of speech and expression “in the interest of public order or morality”, as quoted according to Article 10(2) (a) of the Constitution.
“Hence, the proximate connection of Section 298 with the reasonable restriction allowed under the Constitution.
“The provision is wide enough to include any action which is known to be likely to wound the religious feelings of others.
“Therefore, by not stating public order in the penal provision does not give rise to any consequences,“ Muniandy was quoted as saying.
The filmmakers were represented by lawyers N. Surendran and Zaid Malek while the prosecution was handled by deputy public prosecutors Abdul Malik Ayob and Nor Azizah Aling.
Following the legal proceedings, Khairianwar and Tan’s lawyer, Surendran said they would file an appeal at the Court of Appeal.
On January 17, 2024, Khairianwar and Tan both pleaded not guilty to the charge of wounding the religious feelings of others regarding their film ‘Mentega Terbang’ that explores the theology of major religions.
