In a Facebook post, Nik Elin (above) said her reading of the 147-page Syariah Offences (Kelantan) Enactment 2026 revealed at least 11 provisions that could potentially face legal challenges.

“Do not always punish the people (of Kelantan) with laws that may ‘sound good’ in name and wording, but ultimately end up as political rhetoric and can be challenged by Nik Elin 2.0,” she said, referring to the possibility of other critics like her emerging.

Her warning comes despite the Kelantan state government formulating the new syariah offences law to avoid future legal challenges over its constitutionality. In her post, the lawyer did not list the 11 provisions that could be challenged.

However, when contacted, she said among the provisions that could be challenged were sections 12, 15, and 16. This covers disturbance to Muslims places of worship; safeguarding private parts; and safeguarding other body parts. The last two provisions are meant to discourage sexual acts contrary to Islamic law. Nik Elin told Malaysiakini the enactment's definition of a Muslim as per Section 2 could also be challenged.

The definition includes “a body, movement, or group whether incorporated or not incorporated” managed by a Muslim and further covers such a body that carries out “any activities, takes a stand, or shares opinions on any matters related to syariah law”.

On the Other Hand : PAS tries hard to make it seem like they are holier-than-thou, but there is a huge divide between what they prescribe for the man in the street, and for what they do themselves, and what they feel their friends can do. 

Witness how PAS leaders were calling for the scoundrels involved in the GIHSB scandal to be treated with kid gloves? What happened to the public caning and shaming that PAS so often likes to prescribe in that case? 

The hypocrisy and double standards stand out like a sore thumb. The entirety of it, from its very beginning, was just a scheme to get rich quick and take that which belonged to others.

Nature : All this legal thing doesn't make sense if No economic development and people living in poor conditions.

Anony_1601363616034791660231601362776648 : You are spot on... These legal things are put in place to control the masses or shall i say "ummah... its not applicable for themselves or those higher up then these implementers. These ladies can make a super combination if they could join together...

1. Nik Elin
2. Siti Kassim
3. Mariam Mokhtar
4. Tengku Yasmin Nastasha Tengku Abdul Rahman( Nik Elin's daughter)

Notice all these 4 brave women never wear the tudung!!...

DonGetMeWrong : Religion is personal. No other religions has religious law to force believers into submission. 

Does Christianity, Buddhism, Hinduism etc other than Islam has banking, financing, insurance, even stock exchange has halal certified counter, halal certification for doing business to comply with? 

So much complication to be a Muslim. Just wondering

Raja Chulan : A whole gang of the 'best' Islamist brains in Kelantan vs one plain simple women and the women wins. Ha! Ha!

apanama is back : While most of us know why PAS lawmakers in Kelantan are focusing too much on religion rather than improving the quality of life of the Kelantanese, this issue goes beyond the incompetence of the lawmakers and their enthusiasm for the enactment and implementation of syariah laws, no matter how they run counter to our Federal Constitution. 

One needs to look at the root cause and the historical facts on how indoctrination happened so that the majority Muslim will support this syariah law unquestioningly. The following is the well-documented study report. 

Malaysia ranks among the top countries worldwide in the degree of state regulation of religion. Malaysia ranks sixth out of 198 countries worldwide in the degree of restrictions on the free practice of religion, surpassing even Saudi Arabia (Pew Research Centre 2017). 

In another measure, the government involvement in Religion Index, only ten countries worldwide have a higher ranking than Malaysia. Malaysian law requires Muslims to attend Friday prayers, fast during Ramadan, and abide by dietary restrictions year-round. Drinking, gambling, and "sexual deviance" are prohibited, as is interfaith marriage and conversion out of Islam. 

But over and above these rules and regulations, it is the state's monopoly on religious interpretation that is the most striking feature of Malaysian law. Once recorded in the official Gazette, fatwas from state-appointed officials assume the force of law and public expression of alternate views is criminalised. 

From this vantage point, Malaysia appears as a religious state, at least for the 60% of Malaysian Muslims who are subject to these laws. From this vantage point, Malaysia appears to be the antithesis of a secular state and the realisation of a religious state, at least for the sixty per cent of Malaysian Muslims who are subject to such rules and regulations. 

Aspects of religion and governance are clearly intertwined in Malaysia. Still, the Malaysian case illustrates how the simple dichotomy of "secular" versus "religious" can obfuscate more than it reveals. As recent work shows, the secular/religious binary takes its own starting point for granted. 

It overlooks how both categories are constructed as mirror opposites, as well as the modern state's expanding regulatory capacity. In addition to this binding monopoly over the interpretation of Islamic law, the Malaysian government built significant infrastructure to deliver its state-sanctioned understanding of Islam. 

Witness that fifty-six deviant sects (including Shia Islam) have been outlawed. In the Federal Territories, the Administration of Islamic Law Act also establishes a monopoly on the administration of mosques, including the trusteeship and maintenance of all existing mosques (Articles 72 and 74), the erection of new mosques (Article 73), and the appointment and discipline of local imams (Articles 76–83). 

More than this, federal and state agencies dictate the content of Friday sermons (khutab). Imams, already on the government payroll and licensed by the state, are also monitored and disciplined if they veer too far from state-proscribed mandates. 

Combined with the state's extensive reach in other areas, such as public education, television and radio programming, and quasi-independent institutions such as IKIM (Institute for Islamic Understanding), the state plays a prominent role in shaping popular understandings of Islam. 

No wonder you could see that there are very few "Nik Elin" who could see their true colour out of the 'indoctrination circle.'

BOBBYO : Whole life they have no work to do but keep on trying to control human beings. What they can say, do and even at times eat, places they can go, what they wear, with whom they can socialize and even there will be a time they will decide of how can you die. 

According to their interpretation of the Holy Book. God created humans and gave them a free will to choose. Humans find ways of how they can enforce their laws to entrap the humans in the various cages of their so called laws. 

Laws which by right which is between man and God, but these radicals want to be busy bodies and have their say in the every part of the human life and also dish out their mode of punishment. Not satisfied they want to even draft laws according to their own interpretation of the Constitution. 

Our forefathers who sat and consulted all those involved in achieving independence for the nation. They had to make sure that all the parties involved were satisfied and the interest of the various races looked after. Fast forward 60 over years, and what do we have here. 

New leaders who want to interpret and introduce their own version of the agreement signed by our forefathers. If only our forefathers would be alive today and see what is happening to the nation, they worked so hard to achieve freedom from the British. 

How religion and race is manipulated and used to achieve political success. Not finding ways to build up the economy. Not finding ways that will lift the standard of education, so that the people can compete with the best. Not finding ways to make sure the people have the best of the health facilities. 

Not finding ways to provide clean water or even make sure that the people have the best and fastest internet facilities. Not finding ways where the people have the best mode of transport. They have all the time in the world to sit down and draft laws, to try and find ways to go around the Constitution and come up with their version of laws. 

There should be more people like Nik Elin Nik Rashid that will speak out and defend what our forefathers agreed upon and drafted out the nation's Constitution.

Dr Suresh Kumar : What a brave lady. Hats off to her for courage to take on the Lebais to defend our supreme constitution.

Dr Peter Jebaseelan Jesudason : Muslims must be wary of those in authority who want to enhance their control over them by introducing Sharia legislation which conflicts with the Malaysian constitution. 

The Malaysian constitution is the supreme law of the land. Sharia has very limited application and is for Muslims only and it concerns issues related to " family law ". The scope of Sharia punishments is heavily restricted by the Malaysian constitution. 

Sharia punishments such as stoning and limb amputation is banned. Even the number of strokes of the rotan is limited by the Malaysian constitution. Brave Muslims like Nik Elin are giving notice to the Islamic authorities that they refuse to be treated " seperti lembu dicucuk hidung ".