The Roots and Persistence of Terengganu’s Hardline Approach to Islamic Law

INTRODUCTION

Terengganu has recently taken steps towards enforcing a shariah-based legal measure that permits the imprisonment of Muslim men for up to two years should they neglect the obligation of Friday prayers without a valid justification. The obligation of the Friday congregational prayer for adult male residents is firmly established within the jurisprudence of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jamaʿah (ASWJ).

Governed by the Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), Terengganu introduced legislation in August 2025 that offenders found guilty of failing to perform the Friday congregational prayer may face not only imprisonment but also a fine of up to MYR3,000 (approximately USD 710), or both, in the absence of a legitimate exemption. This was announced by Dr Muhammad Khalil Abdul Hadi, member of the state executive council responsible for the portfolio of information, preaching and shariah empowerment, who has been driving the rigorous implementation of shariah law in the state. He is notably the son of PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang, himself a native of Terengganu.

According to Khalil, this measure is deemed necessary because the Friday congregational prayer is not merely a religious rite (shiʿar) in Islam, but also a symbol of firmness, obedience, and discipline within the faith. Previously, punitive measures were imposed only on individuals found to have deliberately neglected three consecutive Friday prayers. The present initiative thus represents a far more stringent approach by state authorities.

Khalil also announced the mechanisms for implementing the punishment. Banners reminding the public that such neglect constitutes a criminal offence under Shariah law will first be displayed at every mosque. He further explained that enforcement would be carried out in two ways: first, through active monitoring by state religious authorities; and second, based on complaints received from members of the public.

This severe measure is not without precedent in Terengganu. In 2019, six local men—two of whom were minors—were sentenced to one month’s imprisonment and fined MYR2,500 (USD 598). They had been apprehended while bathing at the Sekayu Waterfall recreation area in Kuala Berang, Hulu Terengganu, between 1.00 pm and 1.50 pm, during the prescribed time for the Friday congregational prayer. Their arrest was facilitated by female enforcement officers who initially conducted surveillance, after which male officers moved in to detain them. Additionally, in 2023, eleven men were detained for the same offence.

More recently, in 2024, four fruit vendors were arrested for allegedly conducting business during the time of the Friday prayer. Three of them paid a fine of MYR3,000, while the fourth, unable or unwilling to pay, was sentenced to three months’ imprisonment. To ensure the effective enforcement of this regulation, since 2024, all business premises in Terengganu have been required to suspend operations between 12.30 pm and 2.30 pm every Friday.

Yet, what is less widely recognised is that the section concerning absenteeism from the Friday prayer was subsequently amended in 2016 to stipulate punitive measures even against individuals absent on a single occasion. This amendment was enacted during the period when the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) controlled the state government of Terengganu.

All Malaysian states stipulate shariah criminal offences for adult male residents who neglect the Friday congregational prayer. However, Terengganu appears to be among the few states to rigorously enforce such provisions; the PAS-led state government there has chosen to implement the punishment as stipulated in the 2016 amendment to the Syariah Criminal Offences (Taʿzir) Enactment.

However, recent media reports attributing this strict implementation solely to the administration of PAS are misleading. In reality, the capacity to enforce stringent Islamic legislation cannot be ascribed exclusively to PAS. It is true that the section pertaining to the offence of neglecting the Friday prayer was first drafted in 2001, during a period when Terengganu was under PAS governance, and the State Legislative Assembly had passed the enactment on shariah criminal offences concerning ḥudud, qiṣaṣ, and taʿzir. Yet, what is less widely recognised is that the section concerning absenteeism from the Friday prayer was subsequently amended in 2016 to stipulate punitive measures even against individuals absent on a single occasion. This amendment was enacted during the period when the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) controlled the state government of Terengganu. It is thus arguable that any political party seeking electoral support in the state would adopt a similar approach towards religious affairs.

The amendment to Section 16 concerning the neglect of the Friday prayer was tabled by Ghazali Taib, Chairman of the State Committee on Communication, Multimedia, and Special Duties, representing UMNO. Moreover, alongside the amendment to Section 16, several other revisions were also introduced, including to Section 19, which concerns the offence of disrespecting the month of Ramadan. When presenting the proposed amendments, Ghazali argued that the existing fines were too low and, therefore, inadequate to instil discipline or raise awareness within society. Thus, both PAS and UMNO—two parties that have alternated in governing Terengganu—have deliberately chosen to institutionalise this stricter approach.

The practice of Islam in pre-colonial Terengganu is often cited and upheld by Islamist groups as evidence that Islamic law can, and indeed once did, function effectively in the local context. On this basis, the Islamic governance model once practised in Terengganu is regarded as both a precedent and a point of reference for those, particularly within PAS, who seek to expand the implementation of Islamic punishment nationwide.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF SHARIAH LAW IN TERENGGANU

The implementation of shariah law in Terengganu is by no means a recent phenomenon. Islamic law had already been enforced in the state prior to British colonialism. Its application can be traced back to the reigns of Sultan Zainal Abidin I (1708–33), Baginda Omar (1839–76), and Sultan Zainal Abidin III (1881–1918).

Sultan Zainal Abidin I is often credited with laying the foundations of Islamic legal practice in Terengganu. These laws were subsequently enforced under Baginda Omar, who introduced punishments such as amputation for theft. During the reign of Sultan Zainal Abidin III, greater emphasis was placed on the cultivation of Islamic creed (ʿaqidah) according to the ASWJ, while Islam was also formally established as the official religion of Terengganu through its incorporation into the state constitution. This indicates that even by the time of British arrival in Terengganu, and indeed in the wider Malay Peninsula, Islamic practices in the state had already been firmly institutionalised and rigorously observed within society.

The jurisprudential orientation of Terengganu, which places strong emphasis on legal enactments, was particularly consolidated during the reign of Baginda Omar. His administration not only ensured the long-term enforcement of shariah punishments but also established a range of Islamic institutions to guarantee smooth governance. Under Baginda Omar, the implementation of shariah law represented a continuation of Sultan Zainal Abidin I’s earlier reforms. He reinforced hudud and criminal punishments—including amputation for theft and hanging for murder—while institutionalising religious governance through the establishment of mufti and qadi offices. These learned scholars would advise the ruler in order to ensure that legal administration remained systematic and grounded in Islamic jurisprudence.

The implementation of Islamic law in Terengganu during this period was rooted in the jurisprudence of the Shafi’i school. This development was facilitated by the patronage of the aforementioned Malay Rulers, who not only financed the production of legal and theological texts but also cultivated close ties with the ʿulamaʾ. At the same time, traditional pondok institutions, where legal thought was taught, proliferated across the state. Although no formal codification of Islamic law existed beyond the Rules of Court and the 1911 Terengganu Constitution, scholars such as Abu Bakar Abdullah note that authoritative works like Minhaj al-Ṭalibin (Imam al-Nawawi), Nihayah al-Muhtaj (al-Ramli), Mughni al-Muḥtaj (Muhammad Khatib al-Sharbini) and al-Umm (Imam al-Shafi’i) were employed as primary legal sources in judicial decision-making.

This trajectory must also be situated within the broader historical context: Islam had already been established in Terengganu since at least the fourteenth century, as evidenced by the discovery of the Batu Bersurat Terengganu, a monumental inscription containing injunctions of Islamic law.

Following the era of the Batu Bersurat Terengganu, which underscored the centrality of Islamic law, successive Malay Rulers in Terengganu continued to uphold and enforce shariah governance. It is on this basis that many contemporary proponents of Islamic law in Malaysia argue for its feasibility, contending that “Islamic shariah once functioned effectively in the Malay world prior to the arrival of British colonial power”. Indeed, during the reign of Sultan Zainal Abidin III, British authorities proved unable to dislodge either the implementation or the lived practice of Islam in Terengganu.

“Terengganu Islam” may thus be characterised as a distinctly localised brand of Islam, rooted in the Shafi’i school of jurisprudence and aligned with the creed of ASWJ. It derives its intellectual lineage from the authority of the traditional ʿulamaʾ while enjoying the full patronage and protection of the royal institution. These elements set Terengganu apart from the development of Islam in other states, which is usually neither clearly defined nor truly realised.

TOWARDS THE “FULL” IMPLEMENTATION OF ISLAMIC LAW IN TERENGGANU?

It is therefore unsurprising that Abdul Hadi Awang—a prominent cleric from Terengganu, long-serving president of PAS, and Member of Parliament for Marang—remains fervently committed to the realisation of Islamic law in Malaysia. This historical continuity also helps explain his rhetorical and political framing: namely, that secularism has corrupted and disrupted the image and practice of Islam in the country, and that those who defend Malaysia’s constitution—drafted under British colonial auspices—ought to be regarded, in his view, as “enemies of Islam”.

It is also upon such historical convictions that Abdul Hadi feels no need to temper his views. In commenting on the Federal Court’s decision in the Nik Elin case—which challenged the constitutionality of sixteen criminal provisions in the Kelantan Syariah Criminal Code (Enactment 2019)—he went so far as to remark that the Malay Rulers ought to be “visionary with regard to the hereafter, and not merely pursue worldly interests.” This statement provoked strong reactions, including the expressed displeasure of Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah of Selangor.

The Sultan of Terengganu, consistent with the historical legacy of the Terengganu sultanate discussed earlier, has expressed unequivocal support for the empowerment of Islamic law in the state. In 2025, Sultan Mizan, in his address to the State Legislative Assembly, urged the state government to continue prioritising the strengthening of shariah as one of Terengganu’s key policy agendas. He emphasised support for initiatives encompassing the consolidation of legal frameworks, the enrichment of Islamic scholarship, and the enhancement of judicial facilities in line with contemporary needs and developments, including the establishment of a Supreme Syariah Court.

Given that Islamic affairs fall constitutionally within the jurisdiction of state governments, with the Malay Rulers as the Heads of Islam, it may be argued that the primary obstacle confronting PAS in Terengganu lies only in the constraints imposed by the Federal Constitution. This has been the central narrative that PAS has long advanced: namely, that there are no substantive barriers to implementing shariah in Terengganu—or indeed across Malaysia—since such laws had been historically operational, and since religious affairs remain the absolute prerogative of the state rulers. This argument was reaffirmed by Muhammad Khalil following the decision in the Nik Elin case:

“Islam has long been practised in the Malay Peninsula, including in the field of criminal law. The inscriptions on the Batu Bersurat regarding punishments for adultery, for instance, prove that the state of Terengganu had implemented Islamic teachings comprehensively for centuries. This clearly demonstrates that Islamic law has been part of Malaysia’s legal tradition. This position was recognised and enshrined in the Federal Constitution at the time of its drafting, when Islam was elevated as the religion of the Federation, and jurisdiction over syariah was retained under the authority of the Malay Rulers in their respective states.”

In 2025, a woman was sentenced to 20 days’ imprisonment for selling food to non-fasting Muslims. Moreover, Terengganu has carried out public caning, albeit in restricted venues such as selected mosques … This has raised concerns among proponents of the Federal Constitution, who view such practices as a gradual normalisation of the full implementation of shariah in Malaysia.

It is precisely here that one finds the foundation of what may be described as “Terengganu Islam”, a framework that undergirds the introduction of increasingly stringent and rigorously enforced Islamic laws in the state.

Criticisms that the implementation of Islamic law in Terengganu is excessively harsh—for instance, in penalising men who neglect the obligation of Friday prayer—are unlikely to destabilise PAS’ administration in the state. This is because the people of Terengganu have long been accustomed to an Islam oriented around stringent legal injunctions, since at least the eighteenth century. As the foregoing historical overview demonstrates, Terengganu’s Islamic practice has always leaned towards rigorous enforcement of the law.

All indications suggest that the Terengganu state government is exerting its utmost effort to implement Islamic criminal law to the largest extent possible. Beyond prosecuting individuals who deliberately neglect Friday prayers, in 2022, the state authorities amended the Syariah Criminal Offences Enactment by introducing four new provisions: Section 3A (witchcraft and sorcery), Section 29A (pregnancy or childbirth out of wedlock), Section 33A (women posing as men), and Section 36A (preparation to commit sodomy).

The state has also taken a stricter stance on Muslims who fail to fast during Ramadan. In 2025, a woman was sentenced to 20 days’ imprisonment for selling food to non-fasting Muslims. Moreover, Terengganu has carried out public caning, albeit in restricted venues such as selected mosques and before a limited number of witnesses. This has raised concerns among proponents of the Federal Constitution, who view such practices as a gradual normalisation of the full implementation of shariah in Malaysia.

CONCLUSION

Despite the administrative weaknesses of the Terengganu state government under its Menteri Besar, Dr Ahmad Samsuri Mokhtar—whether in terms of economic management or financial governance—it remains exceedingly difficult for any political party to wrest control of the state in the coming elections.

As previously noted, regardless of whether PAS, UMNO, or even Amanah were to govern Terengganu, the Muslim populace of the state remains unwavering in their demand for the full implementation of Islamic law. This is evident from the fact that voters have consistently voted for PAS based on their explicit campaigns on the implementation of Islamic law. This implies that any incoming government must acknowledge and conform to the socio-political, Malay-Islamic cultural, and historically unique context of Terengganu. However, it is also important that they take into consideration the economic needs of voters.

Indeed, the state’s distinctive historical trajectory has cultivated a conviction among its Muslim community that the shariah can, and ought to, be implemented, given that even under British colonial rule, it was selectively applied. Disruptions to its fuller application only arose after Malaysian independence, through the Federal Constitution, whose framers were closely tied to UMNO and the British.

The pressing question, then, is how Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s government, with its Madani agenda grounded in maqaṣid al-shariah (the higher objectives of Islamic law), can influence Terengganu’s brand of Islam in line with the broader Islam Madani framework that is more inclusive—one that embraces diversity of opinion, schools of thought, ethnicity, and religion. On the part of PAS, it is not inconceivable that the party might one day cooperate with, or even join, the Unity Government—provided that the sanctity of “Terengganu Islam” remains untouched.

This is an adapted version of ISEAS Perspective 2026/2 published on 13 January 2026. The paper and its references can be accessed at this link.