This follows a majority decision by a three-member bench refusing her leave to appeal a Court of Appeal ruling handed down last year.

Justice Hasnah Hashim, who chaired the bench, said the woman, whose identity is being withheld at the request of her lawyers, did not cross the threshold set under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 to obtain leave to appeal from the appeals court’s ruling.

“The leave application is dismissed with no order to costs,” said Hasnah, who formed the majority on the bench with Justice Rhodzariah Bujang.

Justice Mary Lim dissented.

Under Section 96, leave is granted only if there are novel constitutional or legal questions of public importance raised for the first time.

Lawyer Fahri Azzat said today’s decision had confirmed that there is no legal recourse for a person to leave Islam if permission is not granted by the shariah courts.

“A Muslim has no freedom of religion in Malaysia,” he told the media outside the court.

The woman had filed four central questions to obtain leave from the apex court.

They include whether the civil courts can review a decision of the shariah courts and whether the religious courts in Kuala Lumpur have implied jurisdiction over an application by a Muslim to leave the religion.

She also wanted the apex court to consider whether the power of the shariah courts to determine one’s faith is contrary to the constitutional rights to freedom of religion, equality and education.

She also wanted the court to determine whether the Federal Territory shariah court’s implied jurisdiction over applications to leave Islam runs contrary to the express provisions of the Administration of Islam (Federal Territories) Act 1993.

Earlier, Fahri, who was assisted by Iqbal Harith Liang, submitted that his client wanted to renounce Islam to get married.

“Existing case law has gone in different ways. It is in a mess at the moment. Leave should be granted for the Federal Court to confirm or correct the situation,” he added.

Senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly said a Muslim has to go to the shariah court to renounce Islam and the civil court has no such jurisdiction.

“This issue has been settled in a Federal Court ruling two years ago when it set the guidelines. There will be no finality if the subject matter is reopened,” said Hanir, who was assisted by federal counsel Sallehuddin Md Ali and Ainna Sherina Saipolamin.

On Aug 23 last year, the Court of Appeal dismissed the woman’s appeal for leave to bring judicial review proceedings in her bid to renounce Islam. It held that the civil courts have no jurisdiction to review decisions handed down by the shariah courts.

The woman, born a Muslim, claimed she never practised Islam and that her mother had allowed her to choose her religion.

She had gone to the Kuala Lumpur shariah high court in 2018 to seek an order that she be allowed to renounce Islam as she intended to practise Buddhism.

However, the shariah court ordered her to attend 12 counselling sessions instead.

Two years later, the shariah court denied her application to leave Islam and ordered her to attend additional counselling sessions instead. An appeal to the shariah appeals court failed.

The woman then turned to the civil courts to nullify the decisions of the shariah courts. She claimed the decision to reject her application to renounce Islam violated Article 11, which guarantees an individual’s freedom of religion.

Her application had previously been dismissed by the High Court in 2022.