The apex court scheduled case management before a senior assistant registrar in Kuala Lumpur for the parties to obtain directions for trial.
Bench chairman Abu Bakar Jais, also the Court of Appeal president, announced the order after the prosecution and defence agreed that the questions posed to the apex court could be raised during trial.
“If the High Court makes a mistake, the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court can correct it on appeal,” he said.
One of the questions posed was whether intent to commit an offence applies to cases brought under the Sedition Act or whether sedition is a strict liability offence.
Others on the bench hearing the reference application were Chief Judge of Malaya Hashim Hamzah, and Justices Rhodzariah Bujang, Lee Swee Seng and Nazlan Ghazali.
At the outset of proceedings, Abu Bakar said the questions posed to the apex court could be raised before the trial judge.
Abu Bakar said no adverse decision had been made against Muhyiddin as the prosecution would have to call its witnesses to prove a prima facie case.
After a brief recess, Muhyiddin’s lead counsel Amer Hamzah Arshad informed the bench that the prosecution and defence had considered the guidance provided.
“We have since taken instructions from our client. We have discussed with the respondent (prosecution) who accepts that the question of intention is a live issue which can be properly raised during trial,” he said.
The reference application, made under Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, relates to remarks Muhyiddin made in August 2024, in the run-up to the Nenggiri by-election.
Muhyiddin was accused of questioning the discretionary authority of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong at the time, following the monarch’s decision not to appoint him as prime minister after the 2022 general election despite his claim of commanding the support of 115 MPs.
The Bersatu president and Pagoh MP was charged under Section 4(1)(b) of the Act, which carries a maximum fine of RM5,000, up to three years’ jail, or both.
Muhyiddin’s lawyers argued that, among others, Muhyiddin’s speech had discussed Article 43 of the Federal Constitution which cannot constitute an offence under the Sedition Act.
Lawyers Rosli Dahlan, Chetan Jethwani and Joshua Tay also represented Muhyiddin, who was present in court.
Deputy public prosecutors Saiful Hazmi Saad, Ahmad Zazali Omar and Nadia Izhar appeared for the prosecution.