Lawyer Grace Teoh Wei Shan, representing the Islamic Renaissance Front (IRF), said the matter would be heard before an apex court deputy registrar.
The IRF has taken the position that Section 7 of the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, to control undesirable publications, is against Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.
However, it must get leave from a judge of the apex court before a five-man bench can hear whether there is merit to hear the declaration.
Last month, IRF filed legal papers in the apex court to obtain the declaration. It simultaneously applied for a judicial review in the Kuala Lumpur High Court to oppose the home minister’s ban on three books.
Teoh said High Court senior assistant registrar Nor Aqilah Abdul Halim had instructed the home ministry to file its affidavit in reply by Jan 5 in response to the IRF’s action.
“IRF has to file its affidavit in reply by Jan 26, and if the ministry has any further affidavits, these have to be filed by Feb 9,” she told reporters after a case management today before Nor Aqilah.
Federal counsel Muzila Mohamed Arsad appeared for the ministry.
IRF is seeking an order to quash the banning of the books titled “Islam Tanpa Keekstreman: Berhujah Untuk Kebebasan”, a translation of Turkish academic Mustafa Akyol’s “Islam without Extremes: A Muslim Case for Liberty”, as well as two volumes of its “Wacana Pemikiran Reformis” series.
The order was gazetted on Sept 6 under the Printing Presses and Publications Regulation which, among others, allows the authorities to prohibit the printing, circulation and possession of printed materials.
IRF is also seeking a declaration that the act is invalid, and goes against provisions in the Federal Constitution.
IRF director Dr Ahmad Farouk Musa, who filed an affidavit in support of the application, said the home minister’s order was in breach of natural justice as it did not give IRF the right to be heard.
Farouk said the minister’s press statement announcing the ban was unreasonable, irrational and took into account irrelevant factors.
“The respondent (minister) has failed to explain how the said publications or contents promote liberalism, contain elements that insult Islam and deviate from the true teachings of Islam,” he said.
Farouk said the minister’s prohibition order was also against Article 3 of the constitution and an interference of jurisdiction, as Islam was a state matter.
He said the outright ban was against Article 10 as parliament had passed laws to only impose restrictions on freedom of speech.
On Nov 29, High Court judge Kamaludin Md Said allowed IRF the leave application after hearing lawyers for Farouk and the government.
Farouk, in his affidavit quoted the minister, who had said the books were prohibited as their contents promoted liberalism, insulted Islam and deviated from the true teachings of the religion.
He added that the publications had not generated any complaint from the minister or affected public order.