Nation

Activists want ambiguity in Communications and Multimedia Act cleared up

KUALA LUMPUR: Civil society groups urge the government to eliminate ambiguous phrases in Section 233 (S233) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) to improve freedom of expression and prevent abuse of power.

Suara Rakyat Malaysia executive director Sevan Doraisamy said the government should elaborate and scrutinise the ambiguous wordings in S233 of the CMA as it restricts the right to freedom of expression.

He said broad terms such as "obscene", "indecent", "false", "menacing", "offensive" and "attempted communication" allows law enforcement wide discretion to prosecute anyone who they deem to violate these provisions. He said these terms also lead to blanket bans on anonymous speech.

Sevan said due to the ambiguous wordings in the law, the restrictions did not pursue legitimate grounds.

"It is especially apparent when the government criminalises not only insults and criticisms against royals, race, religion as well as other institutions such as the police, but also political parody.

"Human rights defenders are among the groups most frequently affected by application of this provision, with resources unnecessarily spent on multiple investigations and/or court cases when all these defenders do are to hold the government accountable in their obligations to protect and empower marginalised communities," he said.

Sevan proposed that the government define the meaning of "false" in S233(1)(a) and also include disinformation as an offence.

He said the term "offensive" in S233(1)(a) should be explained by incorporating various scenarios that are in line with international human rights standards.

"In addition, we should remove 'annoy' from S233(1)(a), as by protecting personal feelings or public sensitivities, this terminology enables the prosecution of any insult, vulgarity, or rude exchange by individuals, even points of view of educational, literary or scientific value.

"Given the current expansive definition of 'offensive' and 'annoy', even if the person is speaking the truth, they can still be charged under this provision, as long as they are deemed to meet these definitions," said Sevan.

He said the terms "abuse", "threaten" or "harass" should be separated because they mean something different.

He said lumping these words together in one section with a blanket penalty contravenes the principle of proportionality.

He also proposed other revisions on the more narrowly-defined circumstances under which anonymous speech can be penalised, and define what constitutes as "obscene".

On Wednesday, Deputy Minister of Communications and Digital Teo Nie Ching said the government welcomed suggestions from members of parliament from both sides of the divide on how to improve S233.

This comes in response to DAP's Bangi MP Shahredzan Johan, who had asked if the government planned to amend S233, claiming that was used to silence criticism against politicians.

He said the act was so wide and has been abused by those in power.

Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (Bersih) chairman Thomas Fann said the Act should define what constitutes "improper use of network facilities or services".

He said "obscene communication" should be properly defined while also explaining the circumstances in which anonymous speech can be penalised.

He said removing such broad wordings would help enforcement agencies identify those who misuse online networks and allow legitimate free speech to thrive.

"We have seen over the years how Section 233 of the Communication and Multimedia Act had been used against critics and activists of the government and sometimes on very frivolous and questionable grounds.

"We welcome amendments to the CMA to clearly define what constitutes 'improper use of network facilities or services, obscene communication' and under what circumstances anonymous speech can be penalised," he said.

G25 spokesperson Datuk Noor Faridah Mohd Ariffin said the current law was open to abuse.

"As (the Act is) presently worded, it can be subject to abuse. The Drafting Division of the Attorney-General's Chambers should redraft this section," she said.

S233 criminalises online content that is obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person.

If convicted, the offender could be fined of not more than RM50,000 or imprisonment for up to one year, or both.

An offender can also be fined for another RM1,000 for every day that the offence is continued after conviction.

Most Popular
Related Article
Says Stories