Malaysia’s new government backslides on free speech – Rights group

3
145

Malaysia’s new administration is increasingly using abusive laws to investigate and prosecute speech critical of the government, Human Rights Watch said today.

Since the Perikatan Nasional coalition took over the federal government in early March 2020, the authorities have sharply heightened investigations of individuals under broadly worded laws that violate the right to freedom of expression.

“Like flicking a light switch, Malaysian authorities have returned to rights-abusing practices of the past, calling journalists, activists, and opposition figures into police stations to be questioned about their writing and social media posts,” said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch.

“The government should stop trying to return to the bad old days and revise the laws to meet international standards.”

Those investigated in recent months include journalist Tashny Sukumaran, who faced police questioning after she reported on immigration raids in an area under an enhanced movement control order due to the presence of Covid-19.

Cynthia Gabriel, the founding director of the Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center), had been called in for police questioning about a letter calling for an investigation into allegations that the government was trading favours for political support.

On 20 May, the police summoned an opposition member of parliament, Xavier Jayakumar, for questioning after he criticizsd the government’s decision to limit the recent sitting of Parliament to a speech by the King.

On 8 May, prosecutors charged a businessman with violating Section 233(1) of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) and Section 505(b) of the Penal Code for social media comments criticising the government for prosecuting individuals who violated the movement restrictions put in place due to Covid-19.

READ MORE:  Pengerusi Bersih 2.0 dipanggil polis untuk siasatan (Malay/English)

On 5 June, prosecutors charged R Sri Sanjeevan, the head of the Malaysian Crime Watch Task Force, with two counts of violating Section 233(1) of the CMA for allegedly posting “false” information about the police on social media.

All the laws cited in these investigations are overly broad and subject to abuse, and all have been used by prior administrations against critical voices, Human Rights Watch said.

Section 233(1) of the CMA makes it an offence to make an online communication that is “indecent, obscene, false, menacing or offence in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person,” and carries a penalty of up to one year in jail and a RM50,000 ($11,695) fine.

Section 504 of the Penal Code, one of the laws cited in the Sukumaran investigation, provides for up to two years in prison for anyone who “intentionally insults … any person, intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause him to break the public peace”.

Section 505(b) of the Penal Code makes it an offence punishable by up to two years in prison to make, publish, or circulate “any statement, rumour or report with intent to cause, or which is likely to cause, fear or alarm to the public, or to any section of the public, whereby any person may be induced to commit an offence against the state or against public tranquillity”.

Communications and Multimedia Minister Saifuddin Abdullah responded to Sukumaran on Twitter on 3 May, stating that he had instructed the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission not to charge her.

READ MORE:  Al Jazeera raids: Media freedom at stake

However, neither the minister nor the government has made a commitment to reform the CMA.

Under international human rights standards, governments may only impose restrictions on freedom of expression if they are provided by law and are necessary for the respect of the rights or reputations of others, or for the protection of national security, public order, public health, or morals. Restrictions must be narrowly drawn to limit speech as little as possible, and sufficiently precise that an individual can understand what is made unlawful.

None of the laws at issue meet these standards, Human Rights Watch said.

“Malaysians should be able to criticise their government and its policies without fear of facing police questioning and possible criminal charges,” Robertson said.

“Instead of dusting off abusive laws for use against its critics, Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s administration should amend or repeal those laws to protect everyone’s freedom of speech in Malaysia.”

Sign Aliran's 'Save our Democracy" petition
Sign Aliran's petition calling for a review of the decision to grant Riza Aziz a DNAA
Thanks for dropping by! The views expressed in Aliran's media statements and the NGO statements we have endorsed reflect Aliran's official stand. Views and opinions expressed in other pieces published here do not necessarily reflect Aliran's official position.

Our voluntary writers work hard to keep these articles free for all to read. But we do need funds to support our struggle for Justice, Freedom and Solidarity. To maintain our editorial independence, we do not carry any advertisements; nor do we accept funding from dubious sources. If everyone reading this was to make a donation, our fundraising target for the year would be achieved within a week. So please consider making a donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB Bank account number 8004240948.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
3 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
song
song
10 Jul 2020 9.36pm

Dissenting views are freedom of speeches which should be allowed and not to convenientlysuppressed by local or federal authorities. These views should be well expressed!

Authorities must facilitate them instead of threatening them with wrong actions.
Or else the uniforms will soon loose its respect and the people will nor value them like in some third world countries.

Santana
Santana
9 Jul 2020 4.59pm

I wonder if anyone or any organisation keep records of government abuse or actions against individuals or NGO’s who criticise government of the day. Such records will help people to clearly see and understand what the government says and does. Otherwise government often spin bad publicity and confuse the people.