An Overview of Judicial Review in The Malaysian Court

Abstract

Judicial review is the power of court to revise the decision and act of the administrative power and legislative action which had acted in exceeds of their power. However, interpretation of ‘exceeding their power’ may differ from one case to another to which the courts are given the discretionary power to decide. This leave uncertainty on the interpretation of the judiciary power to review and may lead to the collapse of the rule of check and balance and the concept of good governance. This study aims to examine the principles and approaches adopted in the judicial review process in Malaysia. These concepts and theories serve as the threshold to the cases of judicial review in Malaysia. The study adopts a qualitative method utilising doctrinal and case study. Analysing cases decided by the Malaysian court on Judicial Review forms a major part of the data analysis. The study found that the Malaysian judiciary has made significant efforts to preserve the rule of law, protect the fundamental rights of the people, and uphold the good governance concept through the function of judicial review. The principles of cases involving judicial review in Malaysia have served as a guideline in describing the rules and restrictions that a judge should follow when exercising the judicial review function. The findings of the study may form a summarised development of judicial review in Malaysia that may be referred to by the policymakers, academicians, and future researchers.