Nik Elin Zurina’s name was not widely known before February 9, 2024.

She is Kelantanese, and had shared the profession of law to her daughter, Tengku Yasmin Natasha.

On the second Friday of February, the mother-daughter lawyer duo walked out of the Federal Court, winning one of the most consequential legal cases in modern Malaysian history.

They were normal citizens; the decision was delivered by the first female Chief Justice, Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat.

The Opposition Leader called the decision a threat to Islam and the powers of the Rulers.

Other opposition leaders and supporters called for the Constitution to be amended.

PAS Secretary-General Takiyuddin Hassan even called it a “Black Friday for Syariah Islam.”

If you look at the case, however, you would find that the decision was more technical than religious.

The Chief Justice, who delivered the judgment, emphasized that this decision did not affect the legitimacy or standing of syariah courts or Islamic law of the country, let alone Islam’s place in the country.

The judgment was ultimately about the limits of powers. Nik Elin and her daughter challenged 18 provisions in Kelantan’s Syariah Criminal Code (I) Enactment 2019.

The main argument was that a state assembly does not have the powers to enact laws that are not within its scope of powers. Only the federal Parliament has powers to do that.

At the beginning of Malaysia’s formation, it was agreed that there are three lists: the Federal List, the State List, and the Concurrent Lists.

States only have the powers to enact laws in the State List, as it is lower in the hierarchy. That also means that any laws enacted by the state not on the State List is not valid.

However, through the years, many states, like Terengganu, Penang and Perak, went ahead to enact laws as they wished, even though they were not within their limits of powers.

No one bothered to challenge these laws even though they were supposed to be invalid, because it took a lot of resources to do so for public interest.

But Nik Elin and Tengku Yasmin Natasha decided to put their money, time, and effort to do so, because they believed in the sanctity of the law, especially when these invalid laws have a substantial impact on the people’s day-to-day lives.

Because the duo started the legal process in 2022 and eventually won, this would create a ripple effect to other state legislations.

Kelantan will have to remove these laws deemed invalid, and the other states’ laws enacted out of their powers must also follow suit.

There is also an important signaling function here to the states.

Legal advisors in state assemblies must observe the State List strictly and can no longer enact any law it wishes.

While it might be passed at the state assembly, it might be struck out at the courts upon challenge.

It wasn’t just a legal case decided on February 9, but a proof that the fight for a progressive society is not lost.

This could go even further. Even though this case is seen as a case about federal versus state powers, it has important ideological outcomes in society.

The upshot is that fewer conservative laws may be enacted that limit liberty, thereby also limiting the influence of conservative parties.

Even if conservative state laws find a way around this into enactment, they will be slower and fewer than before.

All of this was achieved without directly challenging syariah provisions or PAS’s political rule.

It was a highly tactical approach to roll back the green wave without directly challenging.

It focuses on a supposedly technical area that has a longer-term impact on ideology.

The good thing about the case is that it also states that individuals could have standing to challenge laws like that, even though they are not directly or negatively affected.

That means this is a viable strategy for the progressives to shape the society we want.

The conservatives have spent decades investing in schools and communities to shape the young generation to be more right-wing and extreme in its exclusionary in its approach.

The battle for a progressive society is not reserved for elections — it also takes courageous and highly tactical steps like Nik Elin and Tengku Yasmin Natasha.

As a result, Nik Elin and Tengku Yasmin Natasha are forced to endure death threats, harassments, and insults for what they did.

As Muslims, they are caricatured as un-Islamic by challenging Islam and the syariah courts even though that was not what they did.

That makes their act more courageous and more deserving of our support.

It wasn’t just a legal case that was decided on February 9, 2024, but a proof that the fight for a progressive society is not lost.

(James Chai is a Think Tank Chief Researcher and Legal Advisor)