Attorney-General's Chambers opposes court review of Malaysia's diesel subsidy cut
Malaysia’s Attorney-General's Chambers has objected to a judicial review request challenging the June 2024 removal of diesel subsidies in Peninsular Malaysia.
On October 7, 2024, Azhani Marlan @ Abd Halim and Mohd Hatta Sanuri applied for leave to launch a judicial review of the June 9 decision to scrap diesel subsidies in Peninsular Malaysia, which increased the retail price to RM3.35 per litre. The Attorney-General's Chambers, represented by senior federal counsel Mohammad Sallehuddin Md Ali, argued that subsidy allocation is a policy matter beyond judicial scrutiny and that the case is academic after price standardisation on July 1.
The applicants, represented by Mohaji Selamat, claim the decision breaches Article 8 of the Federal Constitution and Section 6(2)(g) of the Control of Supplies Act 1961, citing unequal treatment compared with Sabah and Sarawak. They also argue that reinstating subsidies later does not erase the impact of the original cut. The court scheduled a ruling on the leave application for November 16, with Judge Norliza Othman presiding.
Why it matters
The case could define whether government subsidy decisions are subject to judicial oversight in Malaysia.
How the sides frame it
LOW AGREEMENTLeft-leaning coverage frames the issue as a demand for a fairer electricity subsidy review, while centrist and right-leaning coverage frame the Attorney-General's Chambers' move to block judicial review of the diesel subsidy cut as a policy matter beyond court scrutiny and now academic.
LEFT
Frames the story as a call for a broader, fairer review of electricity subsidies, highlighting perceived unfairness of the usage-based system.
CENTER
Frames the story as the Attorney-General's Chambers asserting that the diesel subsidy removal is a policy decision not subject to judicial review and that the case is now academic.
RIGHT
Frames the story similarly, emphasizing the Attorney-General's Chambers' argument that subsidy allocation is a policy matter beyond court scrutiny and that the challenge is academic.
The left emphasises
- review electricity subsidies
- broader considerations
- current system based on power usage may not be fair
The right emphasises
- Attorney-General's Chambers argues subsidy allocation is a policy matter beyond judicial scrutiny
- case is academic after price standardisation
- scrap diesel subsidies increased retail price to RM3.35 per litre
In this story
