KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 30 — Malaysia’s 2025 saw the courts handing out landmark rulings that touched on Malaysians’ rights including the freedom of expression and freedom to gather peacefully for rallies.

Here are the cases that made headlines in 2025:

1. Didn’t tell the police five days before a peaceful rally? It’s not a crime anymore

On July 1, the Federal Court unanimously decided to strike down the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012’s (PAA) Section 9(5) for breaching the constitutional right to peaceful assembly, which means it is no longer a crime punishable by a maximum RM10,000 fine if an organiser fails to give the police a five-day advance notice of a peaceful rally.

After the Federal Court ruling, Malaysian United Democratic Alliance’s (Muda) former secretary-general Amir Hariri Abd Hadi was later acquitted on August 8 of a Section 9(5) charge.

While there was no longer a threat of the RM10,000 fine, the Malaysian Bar still gave advance notice to the police of its July 14 “Walk to Safeguard Judicial Independence” in line with the PAA’s Section 9(1), and the police facilitated the march by directing traffic and ensuring participants’ safety.

2. Don’t shoot the messenger: Offensive online remarks to annoy not a crime

On August 19, the Court of Appeal unanimously struck down or declared two words — “offensive” and “annoy” — in the Communications and Multimedia Act’s (CMA) Section 233 as invalid, which made it no longer a crime in Malaysia to make offensive online comments with the intention to annoy. 

While the Court of Appeal’s ruling was hailed as a win for freedom of speech in Malaysia, the court decision was on an older version of the CMA, and a newer version of the same law since February has replaced the word “offensive” with “grossly offensive” but kept the word “annoy”.

The Malaysian government is currently appealing this court decision, and was on November 13 allowed by the Federal Court to proceed with the appeal.

3. Perak family’s three stateless generations declared as Malaysians; court’s ruling could prevent others from suffering from intergenerational statelessness

On November 26, the Court of Appeal unanimously decided that three generations of stateless persons in a Perak family — who can trace their roots five generations back to a Malaysian couple — are actually Malaysians.

The landmark court ruling also decided that stateless persons can legally marry and register their marriages in Malaysia, which means the children born to a Malaysian man and his stateless wife can automatically be Malaysians instead of inheriting the mother’s statelessness. 

4. Court orders compensation, police investigations in Dutch model Ivana Smit, activist Amri Che Mat and Pastor Raymond Koh cases

• Dutch model Ivana Smit’s death

On July 29, the High Court ordered the Malaysian government and three others to pay RM1.1 million in compensation to Smit’s mother Christina Carolina Gerarda Johanna Verstappen over the police’s investigation failures into the 18-year-old model’s 2017 death, and ordered the police to restart investigations with updates every three months to the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

On November 18, the Court of Appeal allowed a stay on the High Court decision, which means the government does not need to pay RM1.1 million or give investigation updates while the government pursues its appeal.

• Amri Che Mat’s and Pastor Raymond Koh’s enforced disappearance cases

On November 5, the High Court ordered the government and the police to pay RM3 million in compensation to Amri’s wife Norhayati Mohd Ariffin, and also ordered the government and the police to pay RM3 million in compensation to Koh’s wife Susanna Liew in a separate case.

As Koh had also sued via his wife, the High Court also ordered the government to pay him RM2 million in compensation as well as RM10,000 daily since February 2017 for every day that his location remains unknown — with the total payout to Koh exceeding RM33 million.

The government on November 6 appealed against these two High Court decisions.

5. In SIS Forum case, Federal Court affirms companies are not “persons professing the religion of Islam”

On June 19, the Federal Court in a 3-1 decision quashed parts of a Selangor fatwa which had declared the company SIS Forum (Malaysia) as deviant, as companies cannot profess the religion of Islam. 

The Federal Court did not decide on religious issues such as Islamic beliefs, but was focused on legal issues such as whether Selangor had acted within its powers under the Federal Constitution when it issued the fatwa. 

6. Hindu mum Loh Siew Hong’s children remain Hindus, as Perlis government fails in final bid to revive their unilateral conversion

On April 8, the Federal Court unanimously dismissed the Perlis state government’s final attempt to argue that Hindu mother Loh Siew Hong’s three children’s unilateral conversion to Islam was valid. 

The Court of Appeal in January 2024 had said the Hindu-turned-Muslim father’s unilateral conversion of the three children without Loh’s consent was illegal, while the three children had in a separate case told the High Court in 2023 that they did not want to be Muslims.

7. Family Frontiers and govt agree in court on automatic citizenship for Malaysian mums’ overseas-born children, if conditions met

On March 10 at the Federal Court, Family Frontiers and the Malaysian government settled a years-long case revolving around Malaysian mothers’ overseas-born children’s right to automatically be Malaysians.

When settling the case, the Malaysian government agreed that children born overseas to Malaysian mothers — before a 2024 constitutional amendment comes into force — are entitled to apply and will be registered as Malaysians if they meet certain conditions. 

The settlement is important as the 2024 amendment, which has yet to come into force, would only apply to Malaysian mothers’ children who are born overseas after it comes into force.

8. 1MDB drops lawsuit against Najib’s stepson Riza Aziz

Government-owned firm 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) on February 24 withdrew its US$248 million (RM1.25 billion) lawsuit against former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s stepson Riza Shahriz Abdul Aziz and his two companies, and the High Court on March 7 ordered 1MDB to pay RM225,000 in legal costs. 

The Sessions Court in May 2020 had already granted a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) to Riza on five money laundering charges on the same US$248 million, after he reached a settlement with the Malaysian government and agreed to pay millions in ringgit.

9. Federal government ordered to review how much it should have paid to Sabah during 1974 to 2021

On October 17, the High Court declared that the federal government has to review the annual amount — 40 per cent of what Sabah contributed to Malaysia’s revenue annually — that it should pay Sabah for the years 1974 to 2021.

The High Court described these 48 years as Sabah’s “Lost Years”, as the federal government did not review or update the annual amount, but just continued paying the same fixed amount of RM26.7 million every year during 1974 to 2021. 

The federal government in November filed an appeal against the High Court decision, but clarified it was not appealing against the 40 per cent formula or the need for it to review the annual amount.

10. Semantan Estate fails court bid to physically get back Duta land, but can get compensation from government

On November 13, Semantan Estate (1952) Sdn Bhd lost its bid to proceed with its appeal at the Federal Court, which means that the title for the 263.272-acre Duta Enclave land would not be transferred back to the company.

Instead, the company will only be able to get compensation from the federal government over the land, which the latter illegally acquired in 1956, and the High Court will next assess how much should be paid as compensation.