Civil society condemns Malaysia’s regressive amendments to Communications Act, urges reversal

MALAYSIA: A coalition of civil society groups, including ARTICLE 19, Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ), and Amnesty International Malaysia (AIM), has strongly condemned the passing of regressive amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) following their approval on 9 December.

The Dewan Rakyat passed the controversial CMA amendments with 59 votes in favour, 40 against, and one abstention.

Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil defended the amendments, claiming they strike a balance between freedom of expression and public safety, particularly in tackling issues like child exploitation and the commercial distribution of pornography.

He emphasised that the law primarily targets telecommunications companies rather than individuals or media content creators.

Warning of Increased Censorship and Rights Restrictions

In a joint statement issued on Tuesday (10 December), the groups criticised the Bill for significantly expanding the powers of the Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC).

The amendments enable MCMC to decide what content should be online or removed, compel service providers to disclose user data, and suspend the services of Content Application Service Providers (CASPs) for non-compliance.

Additionally, the Bill introduces harsher punitive measures for offences related to offensive content, without repealing key provisions that undermine freedom of expression, notably Sections 211 and 233.

The statement expressed alarm at the Madani government’s failure to uphold promises for human rights reforms, creating a climate that fosters greater censorship.

“This regression not only impedes progress but also curtails the freedoms of individuals, leading to a society where dissent is silenced, and transparency is increasingly elusive. ”

“We are gravely disappointed that the Madani Government, led by the Pakatan Harapan, has reneged on its Manifesto to review and repeal draconian provisions of acts that restrict free speech, including the CMA. Instead, the government has introduced further rights-restricting amendments,” the statement wrote.

Concerns Over Overreach and Lack of Oversight

The amendments grant the MCMC sweeping powers to regulate online content, allow the MCMC and its ‘authorised officers’ to enter premises, conduct searches and seizures without a warrant, and compel social media platforms to disclose user data upon request without any judicial oversight.

Separately, the MCMC Act has been amended to give the MCMC immunity from any court or other proceedings.

These amendments and the MCMC Act threaten privacy, freedom of expression, and due process as guaranteed under the Federal Constitution and international human rights standards.

Section 247 of the CMA expands the scope of the MCMC’s investigative powers to request records, including data that service providers must retain under new record-keeping rules set by the Minister.

Under Sections 252A and 252B, the MCMC can compel service providers to disclose and preserve user data, undermining data protection and privacy rights.

The Bill was approved with specific amendments to Sections 211 and 233 of the CMA. These sections address content-related offences, which the government has systematically misused over the years.

This misuse has led to the wrongful detention and investigation of various individuals, including human rights defenders, opposition politicians, journalists, cartoonists, and filmmakers.

While the government claims the new measures will streamline investigations, they fail to uphold the basic principles of liberty as recognised under Article 5 of the Federal Constitution and do not meet the three-part test of legality, legitimacy, and necessity required under international law to justify restrictions on freedom of expression.

‘Inconsistent with Article 10 of the Federal Constitution’

The joint statement said the regressive amendments are inconsistent with Article 10 of the Federal Constitution and Section 3(3) of the CMA, which explicitly states that “nothing in the CMA shall be construed as permitting internet censorship”.

Instead, they risk creating a chilling effect on free speech, eroding public trust, and enabling mass surveillance.

The absence of independent judicial oversight in data access requests exacerbates these violations, stripping citizens of vital protections against arbitrary surveillance.

During the debate, some government and opposition MPs suggested that the Bill be sent to the Parliament Special Select Committee (PSSC) on Human Rights, Elections, and Institutional Reform for broader consultations.

Nevertheless, the Bill was passed without any guarantees of safeguards by the government.

A Call for Reversal of Amendments

Civil society groups have called for the Bill to be reconsidered by the Parliament Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Elections, and Institutional Reform.

They also urged the government to repeal the controversial Sections 211 and 233 of the CMA, which restrict free speech, and to review the entire Act in light of international human rights standards.

The Bill, however, falls short of these principles, creating an environment ripe for overreach and misuse.

The groups further urged the government to commit to transparent policymaking that respects the rights of all Malaysians and fosters greater accountability and trust in governance.

The joint statement was endorsed by: ARTICLE 19, CIJ, Amnesty International Malaysia (AIM), Sister in Islam (SIS), Sinar Project, Justice for Sisters, Freedom Film Network (FFN), Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM), KRYSS Network.