^{Research Methods}

^{1. Review of existing legislations and fatwas}

^{Researchers obtained copies of legislations and fatwas from multiple government databases, including E-Syariah, E-Smaf, i-FIQH, the websites of state Mufti offices, the Current Law Journal, Lawnet, and LexisNexis. Additional sources included the Department of Syariah Judiciary Malaysia (JKSM), State Fatwa Committees, and the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia. When the latest legislations were not publicly available, researchers procured copies directly from MDC Publisher. They also contacted state religious departments and Mufti offices by phone to verify fatwas and obtain relevant documents, ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the collected data.}

^{2. Peer review}

^{Collected data were peer reviewed by researchers to verify the accuracy, relevance and reliability to proceed with any revisions or corrections.}

^{3. Consultation with experts}

^{Several consultations with experts and practitioners working in the area of FoRB were organised from time to time to improve data collection and data review.}

^{Research limitations}

^{1. Outdated legislations}

^{Some Syariah Criminal legislations are not updated based on the latest date of amendment. Some legislations are not available in both Bahasa Malaysia and English. Additionally, reliance on e-Syariah (for Syariah legislations across all Malaysian states) and e-SMAF (for gazetted fatwas) is limited, as these platforms are not maintained and often do not reflect recent developments or updates. Other paid legal databases namely LexisNexis, Law Net and CLJ do not provide Syariah legislations of other states except the Federal Territories’, even though they are equally a codified legal statute. When the latest legislations were not publicly available, researchers procured copies directly from MDC Publisher who publishes books pertaining to laws of Malaysia and/or contacted relevant religious departments for confirmation.}

^{2. The lack of response from public officials}

^{The latest development, religious and fatwa departments and councils from many states responded when being reached via email or telephone to confirm the updated laws and fatwas. However, some states are not responsive. In this case, researchers cross-reference with news reports and expert assessment that could verify the updates.}

^{1. Study of other legislations and executive orders impacting FoRB}

^{This study focuses primarily on Syariah criminal legislations and gazetted fatwas. However, many other state and federal-level laws have also been used to restrict the meaningful practice of FoRB in Malaysia. These include the Enactment on the Control of Non-Islamic Religions’ Propagation 1988 in Selangor and similar enactments in other states, as well as federal laws such as the Sedition Act, the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA), the Printing Presses and Publications Act (PPPA), and the Penal Code. In addition, various executive orders and guidelines—issued under these laws—regulate key aspects of religious expression, including the construction of places of worship and the printing and distribution of religious texts.}

^{2. Transparency in religious institutions}

^{As Malaysia’s religious bureaucracy continues to expand and is funded by public resources, it is essential for religious institutions to practise greater transparency. They should disclose the decision-making hierarchy, how public funds are utilised, the programmes conducted by religious departments and authorities, and granular data on enforcement activities—including the number of raids, arrests, prosecutions, convictions, and the demographics of offenders and prisoners. Strengthening transparency is critical to ensuring that religious institutions are held accountable, just like other democratic institutions in the country.}

^{3. Policy advocacy on FoRB}

^{Policy advocacy on FoRB in Malaysia remains limited. This gap stems from the high level of restrictions that suppress expression and activism which foster dangerous norms and fear. These restrictions have normalised the marginalisation and dehumanisation of religious minorities, women, LGBTQ+ communities, and intellectuals. Reports also highlight abuses of power, including mismanagement of public funds, the misuse of arrest warrants, and human rights violations—particularly in the enforcement of moral policing laws affecting poor, transgender, and youth communities. In addition, our other database shows a rise in moral vigilantism, where private individuals, acting in the name of state religion, use coercion and violence against targeted groups. Therefore, stronger policy advocacy efforts—particularly among civil society, state assembly members (ADUNs), and Members of Parliament—are urgently needed to address these harms.}

^{Our latest database records a total of hegemonic legal restrictions on freedom of religion and belief (FoRB), highlighting systemic limitations imposed through legal provisions and fatwas. The breakdown is as follows:}

^{1. Anti-blasphemy: 90 provisions/fatwas restricting speech or actions perceived as offensive to the Islamic belief.}

^{2. Anti-apostasy: 87 provisions/fatwas criminalising religious conversion, restricting the right to leave or change one’s faith from Islam.}

^{3. Prosecution of religious minorities: 372 provisions/fatwas targeting non-majority religious groups, limiting their rights to worship, express their beliefs, and access public services.}

^{4. Prosecution of sexual minorities: 128 provisions/fatwas criminalising or discriminating against LGBTQ+ individuals’ identity and expression.}

^{5. Prosecution of critical thinking and culture: 135 provisions/fatwas restricting cross-cultural and intellectual discourse and expression.}

 

^{1. Legislations}

^{a. Since the 1980s, Malaysia has experienced rapid religious bureaucratisation, characterised by the expansion of Syariah authorities and institutions. This trend accelerated in the 1990s with amendments to administrative and criminal laws that broadened the powers and jurisdiction of religious enforcement bodies. In the 2000s and 2010s, further revisions introduced new criminal offences and imposed harsher penalties, including updated fine rates aligned with current economic conditions.}

^{b. Most provisions in Syariah criminal legislation categorise moral offences based on interpretations of Islamic law determined by state religious authorities, such as the Mufti’s office and the religious council (Majlis Agama), who serve as key religious policymakers. These provisions are often broadly worded and ambiguous, enabling their use individually or in combination to prosecute individuals for alleged moral misconduct. For example, charges such as “insult to religion” and “opinion contrary to fatwa” are frequently applied—either separately or together—against critical thinkers, religious minorities, and sexual minority groups, effectively criminalising dissent and nonconformity.}

^{c. Although many legislations include provisions against takfir (excommunication), only Sunni Islam, specifically the Ash‘ari-Maturidi denomination, is officially recognised at both federal and state levels—except in Perlis, where Salafism, often labelled Wahhabism, is embraced. This official recognition is upheld through the appointment of muftis and religious bureaucrats aligned with the state’s interpretation of Sunni Islam. Furthermore, various legal provisions and fatwas criminalise other Islamic denominations and sects, including Wahhabism, liberalism, Ahmadiyya, and Shiism.}

^{d. Efforts to entrench Sunni Islam—specifically the Ash‘ari-Maturidi theological creed and Shafi‘i school of jurisprudence—have become more pronounced with the introduction of the Mufti Bill 2024 at the federal level. The bill aims to formalise sectarian control over Islamic affairs in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Putrajaya, and Labuan, potentially setting a precedent for other states too. The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department for Religious Affairs, representing the Pakatan Harapan (PH)–Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition, tabled the bill on 2 July 2024. However, its scheduled debate in early 2025 was postponed following objections from various stakeholders, including the King of Perlis, the Perlis state government, some Members of Parliament and rights-based civil society groups.}

^{e. Through the civil cases of Nik Elin and Iki Putra, the Federal Court annulled several provisions in the Kelantan and Selangor Syariah Criminal Enactments for duplicating federal criminal law, thus rendering them unconstitutional. In Selangor, the court annulled Section 28, which criminalised “unnatural sex.” In Kelantan, 16 provisions were annulled, including:}

^{-Section 11 (destroying places of worship)}

^{-Section 14 (sodomy)}

^{-Section 16 (intercourse with a corpse)}

^{-Section 17 (sexual relations with non-humans)}

^{-Section 31 (sexual harassment)}

^{-Section 34 (false documents/statements)}

^{-Section 36 (intoxicating substances)}

^{-Section 39 (tampering with measurements)}

^{-Section 40 (transactions contrary to Islamic law)}

^{-Section 41 (usury)}

^{-Section 42 (misuse of halal labels)}

^{-Sections 43–45 (vice-related activities)}

^{-Section 47 (incest)}

^{-Section 48 (pimping)}

^{f. These annulled provisions are excluded from the official count in our database, as they are no longer legally enforceable. Following these rulings, both federal and state governments have initiated efforts to review and streamline state Syariah criminal offence enactments to ensure alignment with the Federal Constitution.}

^{2. Punishments}

^{a. Syariah courts in Malaysia are empowered to impose a maximum sentence of three years’ imprisonment, a RM5,000 fine, six strokes of whipping, or any combination thereof, as stipulated under the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 (Act 355). Over the years, there have been multiple attempts to expand these jurisdictions—most notably through a private member’s bill introduced by Abdul Hadi Awang, President of the Malaysian Islamist Party (PAS) and Member of Parliament for Terengganu.}

^{b. The 355 bill has undergone several revisions:}

^{-April 2015 version proposed allowing all punishments under Islamic law, including hudud and qisas}

^{-June 2015 version allowed all sentences except the death penalty} 

^{-November 2016 version sought to extend the maximum penalties to 30 years’ imprisonment, a RM100,000 fine, and 100 lashes.} 

^{-The bill was tabled for the third time in April 2017 ahead of the 2018 General Election but was later postponed, deprioritised, and ultimately dropped following the dissolution of the last parliamentary term.}

^{c. The 2022 amendment to the Terengganu Syariah Criminal Offences (Takzir) Enactment reflects a trend towards stricter enforcement of Islamic moral codes in the states. The amendments maximise punishment under Section 356 of Act 355.}

^{d. Nevertheless, some states have set precedents beyond the legal jurisdiction of Syariah law. In December 2024, the PAS-led Terengganu government conducted another public caning of a male defendant convicted of khalwat (close proximity). The punishment took place at Al-Muktafi Billah Shah Mosque’s public hall before approximately 100 spectators, despite opposition from rights-based groups for violating Act 355. Previously, in September 2018, Terengganu carried out its first public caning of a lesbian couple convicted of musahaqah (same-sex relations between women), though this was held in a hall inside Syariah court compound before a bigger-sized audience. Public outcry over Syariah public caning in Malaysia dates back to 2009, when Kartika Sari Dewi Shukarnor, the defendant was sentenced to caning for alleged intoxication. However, the punishment was never carried out, as Sultan of Pahang at the time commuted her sentence to community service.}

^{e. Terengganu and Kelantan also enacted the harshest Syariah criminal laws (Hudud and Qisas) in 2002 and 1993, respectively, through their state legislatures or Dewan Undangan Negeri. However, enforcement remains stalled as these laws contradict the Federal Constitution, specifically federal criminal law. Despite this, political pressure to facilitate their implementation through amendments to Act 355 persists at the federal level.}

^{3. Fatwas}

^{a. In Malaysia, state fatwa councils, known as Majlis Jawatankuasa Fatwa, issue fatwas to address contemporary issues affecting Muslims’ faith and practices. Only gazetted fatwas hold legal authority; non-gazetted ones remain advisory.}

^{b. Numerous fatwas have been issued to restrict the rights of religious minorities and suppress critical thinking and cultural expressions, often under the pretext of combating deviant teachings or heresy against the state’s interpretation of Islam. Notable examples include:}

^{-As of February 2025, seven states issued fatwas against Global Ikhwan Services and Business Holdings (GISBH), a Muslim-based transnational business and social network, for promoting teachings linked to the banned Al-Arqam movement. Three states (Perlis, Selangor & Sabah) have gazetted their fatwas and the rest (Penang, Melaka, Pahang and Federal Territories) remain ungazetted. Al-Arqam was outlawed in 1994 by the Malaysian government for being a subversive messianic religio-political movement, with the National Fatwa Council also declaring it deviant that same year. Subsequently, its affiliate, Rufaqa’ Corporation, faced similar bans in 2006. Notably, Kelantan (2006), Selangor (2006) and Melaka (2006), Sabah (2006), Terengganu (2007), Johor (2007), Kedah (2007), Sarawak (2006), Penang issued fatwas against Rufaqa’. During this period, GISBH and its followers came under scrutiny for alleged involvement in organised crimes, including the exploitation of children and women, leading to criminal prosecutions under civil jurisdiction, SOSMA.}

^{-In 2023, Johor issued a fatwa and Selangor released an official statement prohibiting Muslims from participating in non-Muslim religious rituals or entering houses of worship. Johor enforces this ban through Section 9 of its Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment 1997. These state-level measures align with Selangor’s 1988 and Johor’s 1991 Enactments on the Control of Non-Islamic Religions’ Propagation, which explicitly prohibit interfaith learning visits, including visits to non-Muslim houses of worship. At the federal level, the proposed Control and Restriction on the Propagation of Non-Islamic Religious Doctrine and Beliefs Among Muslims Bill (last updated in November 2023) further reinforces this trajectory. Collectively, these developments reflect growing legal and religious restrictions on interfaith engagement and narrow opportunities for cross-cultural understanding among Malaysian Muslims.}

^{-Between 2014 and 2017, several Malaysian states, including Selangor and Sabah, issued fatwas declaring pluralism, liberalism, and Sisters in Islam (SIS) as deviant. While SIS challenged the ruling, the case remains ongoing after the Federal Court granted leave to appeal in 2023. Similar fatwas were issued in other states but have not been gazetted.}

^{-Between 2008 and 2010, seven states issued fatwas prohibiting Muslims from practicing yoga, citing concerns over elements of Hinduism that could potentially corrupt Islamic beliefs.}  

^{-Between 2009 and 2015, several Malaysian states, including Selangor, Kedah, Johor, Kelantan, Perak, and Terengganu, issued gazetted fatwas restricting the use of the word “Allah” and other Islamic terms to Muslims only. These fatwas were issued in response to two major legal cases concerning the use of “Allah” by non-Muslims.} 

^{-The Herald case (2007–2014) involved a legal challenge by a Catholic newspaper against a government ban on using “Allah” in its Malay-language publication. Although the High Court initially ruled in favour of The Herald in 2009, the Court of Appeal overturned the decision in 2013, and the Federal Court denied leave to appeal in 2014, effectively upholding the ban.} 

^{-In contrast, the Jill Ireland case (2008–2021, 2023) concerned the confiscation of Christian religious CDs containing the word “Allah.” In 2021, the High Court ruled that Christians have the constitutional right to use “Allah” for private and personal religious purposes. The federal government withdrew its appeal in 2023, confirming the ruling and reinforcing protections for Christian practices, especially in Sabah and Sarawak.}

^{-Between 1997 and 1998, and again from 2007 to 2014, eleven states—including Johor, Kedah, Kelantan, Melaka, Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Penang, Perak, Perlis, Sabah, and Selangor—issued fatwas banning Shia teachings and declaring them deviant.}

^{-Similarly,  six states banned the teachings and the books of Ahmadiyah including Johor, Melaka, Sabah, Selangor, Negeri Sembilan and Perlis}

^{-Between 2015 and 2019, six states—Negeri Sembilan, Pahang, Sabah, Selangor, Johor, and Kedah—issued fatwas declaring Hizbut Tahrir as deviant. Authorities targeted the group due to its rejection of democratic governance, opposition to Malaysia’s constitutional monarchy, and refusal to recognise the existing religious authority structure.}

^{-There are a total of 12 counts of fatwas related to the group, publication and teachings of tariqat (Sufi orders) deemed deviant by religious authorities.  Among the fatwas issued are on Tariqat Mufarridah (1987), Tariqat Zikrullah Hasan Anak Rimau and the teachings of Ayah Pin (2007), the book Irsyad al-Asfiya’ ila Tariqati Khatmul Aulia by Ahmad al-Hadi al-Hasani al-Maghribi (2014) and the Naqsyabandiyyah Khalidiyyah Order under the leadership of Md. Aleh Solihin bin A. Sidiki (2015).These groups were banned from practices such as the veneration of spiritual leaders which was deemed excessive and deviated from the state-sanctioned interpretation of Islam.}

^{-Only six states—Penang (2014), Negeri Sembilan (2014), Sarawak (2016), Selangor (2016), Johor (2016), and Sabah (2017)—formally issued and gazetted fatwas denouncing ISIS and prohibiting violent jihad. Notably, only two other states, including the National Council for Islamic Religious Affairs Malaysia (MKI), issued similar fatwas that were not gazetted. It is significant that the number of fatwas explicitly condemning violence and extremism remains limited, particularly in response to terrorist activities linked to groups like Jemaah Islamiyah in the early 2000s and Daesh (Islamic State) in the 2010s. However, in the aftermath of Daesh-linked Ulu Tiram domestic attack in May 2024, the Johor Fatwa Council also issued a non-gazetted fatwa for the body of the attacker to be buried at a distant site, separate from public burial grounds as a symbolic and moral message for others to reject acts of violence.}

^{Five types of offence that impact FoRB namely anti-blasphemy, anti-apostasy, prosecution of religious minorities, prosecution of sexual minorities and prosecution of critical thinking and culture are collated in the database.}

^{1. Anti-blasphemy}

^{Anti-blasphemy provisions penalise insults or dissenting views against the state-sanctioned religion—Sunni Islam of the Ash‘ari-Maturidi denomination—and are used to punish individuals accused of offending, insulting, or denigrating the religious doctrines, symbols, authorities, or institutions.}

^{2. Anti-apostasy}

^{Apostasy (murtad) is defined as the abandonment of one or more core tenets of the Islamic faith—such as belief in Allah and the Prophet Muhammad (syahadah), prayer, fasting during Ramadan, zakat, and pilgrimage—through renunciation, conversion to another religion, or a declaration of non-belief. Apostasy is punishable under Malaysian law. The law also prohibits the propagation of non-Islamic religious doctrines and the act of placing a Muslim child under the care of a non-Muslim guardian.}

^{3. Prosecution of religious minorities}

^{The state officially recognises only Sunni Islam, specifically the Ash‘ari-Maturidi denomination, as the religion of the federation. As such, gazetted fatwas classify non-Sunni denominations as deviant. Religious minorities include Shia, Ahmadiyya, certain Sufi Tariqat orders, non-denominational groups such as critical or liberal Muslims, and religious-based cult groups like Ayah Pin and Millah Ibrahim. The practices of these groups are criminalised under laws prohibiting false worship, deviant doctrines, teaching without authorisation (tauliyah), and the propagation, possession, or publication of related materials.}

^{4. Prosecution of sexual minorities}

^{Sexual minorities include a range of gender identities and sexual orientations that differ from heterosexual norms, such as lesbian, gay, and transgender individuals. They may be prosecuted for expressing or attempting to express their identities or orientations through acts such as cross-dressing, sodomy (liwat), or lesbian relations (musahaqah), among others.}

^{5. Prosecution of critical thinking and culture}

^{Critical thinking refers to independent reasoning (ijtihad) in interpreting Islamic texts and doctrines, while culture encompasses the customary beliefs, identities, and rituals of specific ethnic groups. In gazetted fatwas, critical thinking and cultural practices deemed incompatible with the state’s interpretation of religion—including the prohibition of certain intellectual publications, cultural dances, ceremonial rites and interfaith activities—are criminalised and punishable under the law.}

^{1. Overview}

^{a. Interactive Map Visualisation – The Map Visualisation shows the Count of Provision (Enactment/Act) and Count of Fatwas in every state in Malaysia. The map allows zooming in and out, panning around and identifying specific features indicated in the small filter that is labelled as ‘type of offence’. The filter is positioned in the right-upper corner of the map.}

^{1. There are four types of offence in the map filter:} 

^{a. Anti-apostasy}

^{b. Anti-blasphemy}

^{c. Prosecution of Critical Thinking and Culture}

^{d. Prosecution of Religious Minorities}

^{e. Prosecution of Sexual Minorities}

^{2. A ‘tooltip’ will appear when you click on a respective state. Each tooltip entails:}

^{a. State}

^{b. Provision (Enactment/Act) Count}

^{c. Fatwa Count}

^{d. Type of Offence}

^{b. Data Table – The Data Table, on the other hand, breaks down the data contained in the Interactive Map Visualisation. Below are the listed columns in the Data Table.} 

^{1. Location}

^{2. Type of Offence}

^{3. Jurisdiction}

^{4. Source of Law}

^{5. Name of Law}

^{6. Date of Law}

^{7. Year of Latest Amendment}

^{8. Number of Provision}

^{9. Heading of Provision}

^{10. Type of Punishment}

^{c. Compatibility}

^{1. On web browsers}

^{1. Chrome on Windows and Mac}

^{2. Microsoft Edge on Windows}

^{3. Mozilla Firefox & Firefox ESR on Windows and Mac}

^{4. Apple Safari on Mac}

^{2. On mobile devices}

^{1. Chrome on Android}

^{2. Apple Safari on iOS 11.3 or later}

^{3. Tableau Mobile iOS and Android Apps, available at the Apple App Store and Google Play Store, respectively.}

^{2. Interactive Map Visualisation}

^{a. Navigating the map (desktop)} 

^{1. Moving the map}

^{1. By using the map view toolbar: In the upper-left corner of the map view, the view toolbar lets you zoom in, zoom out, pan the view and select data points. Use the map view toolbar to navigate the map.}

^{2. By using your cursor: You may also click and drag your cursor to move around the map and double click several times on the area that you want to focus on to zoom in.}

^{2. Viewing the tooltip}

^{1. Click on a respective state to view the tooltip. Each state shows a total number of provisions and number of fatwas.}

^{3. Checking the source linkMoving the map}

^{1. Step 1 – Hover your cursor over the desired state (state)}

^{2. Step 2 – Click on the event}

^{3. Step 3 – Click on the table button (view data)}

^{4. Step 4 – Copy the link in ‘Source Link Clean’ column and paste it in a browser to access}

^{4. Using the dashboard filter}

^{1. The dashboard filter is available to help view specific categories of data. Please click on the respective box and select anything that applies to help you narrow down the data that you are searching for.}

^{2. As for the date box, you may drag the data slider to adjust the duration of month(s) and year(s) to narrow down your time period. Alternatively, you may manually select the date that applies by clicking on the calendar control to fill in your date selection.}

^{b. Navigating the map (desktop)} 

^{1. Moving the map}

^{1. By using your finger: Use two fingers to navigate the map and to hover to the desired location on the map. Drag your fingers apart to zoom in, and bring them together to zoom out.}

^{2. Viewing the tooltip}

^{1. Click on a respective state to view the tooltip. Each state shows a total number of provisions and number of fatwas.}

^{3. Checking the source linkMoving the map}

^{1. Step 1 – Hover to the desired event (state)}

^{2. Step 2 – Click on the event}

^{3. Step 3 – Click on the table button (view data)}

^{4. Step 4 – Copy the link in ‘Source Link Clean’ column and paste it in a browser to access}

^{4. Using the dashboard filter}

^{1. The dashboard filter is available to help view specific categories of data. Please click on the respective box and select applicable fields to help you narrow down the data that you are searching for.}

^{3. Data Table}

^{a. Navigating the table (desktop and mobile)}

^{1. The table breaks down in detail about the legislations and fatwas that impact religious freedom in Malaysia. They are grouped according to:} 

^{a. Location (Name of State)}

^{b. Type of Offence (Anti-Apostasy, Anti-Blasphemy, Prosecution of Critical Thinking and Culture, Prosecution of Religious Minorities and Prosecution of Sexual Minorities)}

^{c. Jurisdiction (Federal or State)}

^{d. Source of Law (Enactment/Act or Fatwa)}

^{e. Status (Enforceable/Annulled)}

^{f. Name of Law}

^{g. Date of Law}

^{h. Year of Latest Amendment}

^{i. Number of Provision} 

^{j. Heading of Provision}

^{k. Type of Punishment}

^{2. Using the dashboard filter}

^{1. The dashboard filter is available to help view specific categories of data. Please click on the respective box and select applicable fields to help you narrow down the data that you are searching for.}

^{2. As for the date box, you may drag the data slider to adjust the duration of month(s) and year(s) to narrow down your time period. Alternatively, you may manually select the date that applies by clicking on the calendar control to fill in your date selection.}