Judicial review in administrative decisions allows for scrutiny of legality and reasonableness, challenging assertions of national security without sufficient supporting evidence.

[1] This is an appeal against the decision of the High Court of Sabah and Sarawak at Kuching (Rhodzariah Bujang J (as she then was), presiding) dated 30 October 2015, granting the respondents application, inter alia, for an order of certiorari to quash the 1st appellants order dated 14 November 2014 which declared the Sarawak Association For Peoples Aspiration ("SAPA") an unlawful and/or illegal society with costs of RM8,000.00.

[2] After hearing the parties, we dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the learned High Court Judge. We now give our reasons.

Background Facts

[3] The background facts relating to this appeal have been set out in the grounds of judgment of the learned High Court Judge. We do not propose to repeat them in entirety, save to highlight the facts that are germane to the appeal.

[4] The respondents are committee/office bearers of SAPA. The 1st respondent, Soo Lina, is SAPAs president, Hugh Lawrence Zehnner, its deputy president, and Tambi anak Pilang, its assistant secretary.

[5] SAPA is a human rights society which has been registered under the Societies Act 1966 (Act 335) on 12 November 2013.

[6] As stated in cl 3 of its Constitution, SAPAs objectives are as follows:

(a) To uphold and promote universal respect for, and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms as enshrined in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights;

(b) To defend the right of every Sarawakian to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and his family, including food, clothing, housing, medical care and other social services;

(c) To defend the right to education for every Sarawakian irrespective of race, creed, gender, language, religion, social origin, birth or other status;

(d) To support and empower communities working for peace and justice, indigenous and human rights, democracy and gender equality;

(e) To initiate and support community programmes for the eradication of poverty;

(f) To provide a forum for like-minded citizens to exchange ideas and experiences;

(g) To accept from government, purchase, take on lease or in exchange or otherwise occupy or acquire any land or building for the attainment of the objectives of the Association; and

(h) Any other initiatives to enhance the progress, empowerment and holistic development of the people of Sarawak.

[7] The main activities of SAPA since its inception are to promote human rights education, especially Sarawakian rights. In this respect, public talks and forums are held which touch on the history of Sarawak, the formation of Malaysia and the Malaysia Agreement. All SAPA forums and other activities are open to the public.

[8] The 1st appellant (Minister of Home Affairs) had declared SAPA as an illegal society pursuant to s 5 of Act 335 vide a Federal Government Gazette published on 14 November 2014. The 1st appellant was of the opinion that SAPA is being used for the purposes prejudicial to the interest of the security of Malaysia and public order.

[9] SAPA was deregistered following the said decision.

[10] Aggrieved with the impugned decision, the respondents filed an application for a judicial review and sought, inter alia, an order for certiorari to quash the impugned decision, costs and other reliefs deemed fit by the Court.

[11] The nub of the respondents contention is that the impugned decision struck at the very tenets of democracy and fundamental civil liberties ie freedom of speech and expression, freedom of thought and freedom of association guaranteed by the Federal Constitution.

[12] The respondents further contended that the impugned decision is totally unjustified. According to the respondents, SAPA never carried out any activities o