All Content Related to Malaysia

Malaysia

evan — Thu, 10 May 2007 15:21:07 -0400

Background

Malaysia has a long history of state censorship and tight media controls. All four major newspapers are pro-state, and any oppositional and independent media outlets face the possibility of harassment by police, extended legal wrangling, detention, and imprisonment for publishing speech critical of the state.1 As many as twenty different Malaysian laws restrict speech, and free speech activists contend this leads to self-censorship by journalists.2 The state also monitors the content of Web sites, and independent news Web site Malaysiakini.com claims to have been the subject of several police investigations and an eviction notice as a result of publishing content deemed defamatory or offensive.3

Internet in Malaysia

Since 1996, Malaysia has embarked on an international public relations campaign to draw technology research and development to its Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC), a high-tech business center and communications infrastructure designed to help Malaysia become an international information technology leader.4 Developing Internet infrastructure in Malaysia is a state priority, and consumers are encouraged to purchase PCs and Internet access. By 2005, Malaysia had approximately eleven million Internet users, and with a national Internet penetration rate of 42 percent was third in Southeast Asia behind Hong Kong and Singapore.5 The state, recognizing the opportunities for e-commerce and for individuals to exchange ideas and information,6 has strongly encouraged adoption of broadband Internet throughout the country.7 Nevertheless, uptake has been slow as dial-up remains the method by which most Malaysians access the Internet.8 Broadband penetration reached a mere 2 percent in 2006, far behind other Southeast Asian regional leaders such as Singapore and Hong Kong, which had broadband penetrations of nearly 16 and 24 percent, respectively.9

Legal and regulatory frameworks

Malaysia’s constitution guarantees every citizen the right of free speech and expression, but also sets significant limitations on that freedom, as Parliament may by law effect “such restrictions [on free speech] as it deems necessary or expedient in the interest of the security of the Federation ….”10 Parliament has enacted numerous laws enabling broad state control over the media. Notable print and broadcast media regulations include the Printing Presses and Publications Act, which requires all print publishers to seek annual renewal of a publication license granted at the state’s discretion, and the Sedition Act, which criminalizes the expression or publication of words that tend to incite hatred or contempt against any government.

The Communications and Multimedia Act of 1998 (“CMA”) and the Communications and Multimedia Commission Act of 1998 (“CMCA”) together directly govern Malaysia’s telecommunications, broadcasting, and Internet sectors, including related facilities, services, and content.11 The CMCA establishes the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, which is empowered to regulate the information technology and communications industries. The commission takes the position that Internet content must be regulated and controlled for “reasons of access, privacy and security and protection of individual rights.”12 The CMA empowers the commission with broad authority to regulate online speech, providing that “no content applications service provider, or other person using a content applications service, shall provide content which is indecent, obscene, false, menacing, or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person.”13 Publishers of media content in violation of this provision may face criminal penalties, including a fine of up to RM50,000 and/or a maximum of one year in prison.14 The CMA also establishes the Content Forum, which formulates and implements the Content Code—voluntary guidelines for content providers concerning the handling of content deemed offensive and indecent.15

The CMA and other laws empower the state with extensive media controls. To foster the growth of the Internet market and the MSC, however, the state has generally refrained from directly censoring the Internet. In its “Bill of Guarantees” to approved MSC companies, the state pledges not to censor Internet content.16 Nevertheless, Internet content publishers in Malaysia operate under constant risk that the CMA and numerous other laws regulating speech and content on traditional media will be interpreted or amended to extend to Internet publications.17

In January 2007, Malaysian Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi made a somewhat ineffectual distinction by stating that while the government policy is not to censor the Internet, bloggers are bound by laws on defamation, sedition, and other limits on speech.18 Badawi’s statement was an official restatement of the policy announced in August 2006 that bloggers who publish seditious, malicious, or defamatory content will be reported to police.19 In January 2007, the New Straits Times (NST) newspaper and several of its executives inaugurated the first known defamation suits against bloggers. Jeff Ooi (http://jeffooi.com/) and Ahirudin Attan (http://rockybru.blogspot.com), both prominent bloggers and the latter the President of the National Press Club, were sued simultaneously for both blog posts and reader comments.20 The allegedly libelous content included Jeff Ooi’s blog coverage of NST and its editors’ roles in misrepresenting facts, publishing a caricature of the Prophet Muhammad and plagiarism in blog posts in 2006.21 Ooi had previously been investigated by the Communications and Multimedia Commission and the police concerning comments a reader posted on his blog that were deemed offensive to the official version of Islam in Malaysia.22

ONI testing results

Testing was conducted during October and November 2006 on two of the largest Malaysian Internet service providers (ISPs), Jaring and TMNet, and also on Macrolynx, a smaller Malaysian ISP. The tests revealed no evidence of filtering for any of the categories tested.

Conclusion

Malaysia retains strict control over traditional broadcast and print media through a broad web of vaguely worded regulations.23 To encourage growth of Internet and new media technologies and commerce in Malaysia, however, the state has promised Internet companies that it will not censor the Internet. ONI’s testing revealed no evidence of technological Internet filtering. This does not necessarily mean, however, that the Internet environment in Malaysia is free of government influence and control. Bloggers and independent online news publishers report being investigated and harassed by police on several occasions for posting allegedly offensive or seditious content, and the state media frequently run articles and opinion pieces questioning whether the Internet should be subject to tighter state controls.

NOTES

1. See Reporters Without Borders, Malaysia: 2004 Annual Report, http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=10201.
2. Ibid.
3. See Steven Gan, “Yes, another police report,” August 11, 2006, http://www.malaysiakini.com/editorials/55265 ; see also South East Asian Press Alliance, “World publishers and editors back Malaysiakini's non-disclosure policy,” January 30, 2006, http://www.seapabkk.org/news/malaysia/20030130.html.
4. See http://www.msc.com.my/msc/msc.asp.
5. International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication Indicators 2006; Paul Budde Communication Pty Ltd., Asia: Internet, March 5, 2006, p. 3.
6. Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia, “Broadband in Malaysia: More supply than demand?” 2006, http://www.cmcf.org.my/HTML/cmcf_industry_watch-12.asp ; The Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia, “Convergence,” 2006, http://www.cmcf.org.my/HTML/cmcf_industry_watch_3.asp.
7. Paul Budde Communication Pty Ltd., Malaysia: Broadband Market, July 30, 2006, p. 1.
8. Ibid.
9. International Telecommunication Union, World Telecommunication Indicators 2006.
10. Constitution of Malaysia, Article 10.
11. See The Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia, http://www.cmcf.org.my/.
12. Ibid.
13. Malaysian Communications Multimedia Act of 1998, section 211(1).
14. Malaysian Communications Multimedia Act of 1998, section 233.
15. See The Communications and Multimedia Content Forum of Malaysia, http://www.cmcf.org.my/.
16. See MSC Malaysia National Rollout, http://www.msc.com.my/msc/rollout_status.asp.
17. See, for example, Star Online, “Government looking at gaps in printing Act,” July 27, 2006, http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2006/7/27/nation/14961817... (“The Government will study if the Printing Presses and Publications Act should be amended to include the electronic media and the Internet media”).
18. Malaysia General News, “Gov’t won’t censor Internet bloggers but they must be responsible, says PM,” January 23, 2007.
19. Reuters, “Malaysian leaders carry quarrel into cyberspace,” August 11, 2006.
20. South China Morning Post, “Newspaper sues Internet bloggers for defamation,” January 19, 2007, reprinted at http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=61629.
21. See Jeff Ooi’s blog Screenshots at http://jeffooi.com/.
22. See Ethan Zuckerman, “Global voices blogger Jeff Ooi questioned in Malaysia regarding Weblog,” Global Voices, February 28, 2005, http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2005/02/28/global-voices-blogger-jeff-....
23. See, for example, http://www.kempen.gov.my/coci/mypress.htm.

Speaking Out in Malaysia

sw — Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:33:48 -0400

The arrest of blogger Raja Petra Kamarudin under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act on September 12, just as his website Malaysia Today (http://mt.m2day.org/) was reported to be unblocked, provides an ominous reminder that there may be more effective ways of silencing independent voices than Internet filtering.

Kamarudin was one of three individuals detained under the ISA on September 12. The reporter Tan Chee Hoon was briefly detained for writing about a ruling party official’s racist remarks, and has been released. Teresa Kok, an opposition member of Parliament, was reportedly detained for objecting to a mosque broadcasting its morning prayers too loudly. Kamarudin has already been embroiled in legal action this year, facing sedition and criminal defamation charges for his writings on Malaysia Today accusing government leaders of malfeasance. However, the provisions of the Internal Security Act (ISA) are far more draconian. The ISA allows for government officials to order the preventive detention of individuals suspected of acting in a manner "prejudicial to the security of Malaysia” for up to two years (and renewable indefinitely) without trial or any judicial review. Not only do the provisions of the ISA violate the right against arbitrary detention, the right to a fair and just trial, and other fundamental human rights, but detainees have also been subjected to torture and other abuses.

De facto Law Minister Zaid Ibrahim, a member of the ruling BN coalition who resigned over his government’s use of the ISA in these cases, said "there were ample punitive laws to act against lawbreakers without having to invoke the ISA. [The law] should only be used on armed terrorists or those out to topple the government by force.”

Along with Burma, Singapore and China, Malaysia’s print and broadcast media is either dominated by or closely aligned with government interests. Into the breach, independent news sites and bloggers have become popular and influential sources of information, and their pivotal role in mobilizing the opposition in Malaysia’s March 2008 general elections was a watershed moment. Until recently, legal resort to defamation and related charges against bloggers and media appeared to suffice for the Malaysian government, as well as for Singapore. ONI testing last year found no evidence of technical filtering in Malaysia, and indeed the promise to abstain from Internet filtering was a guarantee made to companies participating in the development of a national high-tech corridor. While many viewed targeted defamation suits as arbitrary abuses of law perpetrated by the powerful to punish and silence their critics, Malaysia and Singapore did not engage in another form of prior restraint by blocking access to politically sensitive information online. In this way, they provided an alternative model to the rapaciousness of China’s Great Firewall. Now, despite the relative absence of filtering, Malaysian leaders are proving to be increasingly intolerant of critical online political speech.

Malaysia Today is only one site among hundreds that publish information critical of certain government leaders, and blocking it was a sign that the arbitrariness inherent in using executive power to silence one’s enemies has been extended to the Internet. And yet the blocking of Malaysia Today, as with all technical means of filtering the Internet, was imperfect and incomplete. In detaining Kamarudin by using a law that denies him due process rights, and in effect silencing him indefinitely, Malaysia’s ruling coalition is showing itself to be manifestly insecure in its standing with its own people.

Political website Malaysia Today reported blocked amidst crackdown on bloggers

Wed, 27 Aug 2008 12:09:24 -0400

The independent website Malaysiakini.com, reportedly the country’s most popular alternative news source, has announced that the political website Malaysia Today has been blocked by order of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC). On its home page, Malaysia Today claims it is being blocked by TMNet, the country's largest ISP.

Malaysia Today's founder, Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK), was charged with sedition in May 2008 and is scheduled for trial in October 2008. He had published an article on April 25 linking Deputy Prime Minister Najib Razak to the October 2006 murder of a Mongolian translator. Lawyer Muhammad Shafee lodged a complaint against RPK on criminal defamation and sedition charges for claiming that Shafee was complicit in a conspiracy to fabricate sodomy charges against opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim. On August 13, Kamarudin was ordered by the High Court to reveal his sources for three online articles concerning Shafee, reveal the identities of visitors who left comments and messages on Malaysia Today, and remove the articles and all comments from the site.

The targeting of Kamarudin is part of a more concerted effort to dampen the influence of independent news sites and blogs, which have been credited with providing opposition parties with a platform to mobilize around the March 2008 general elections. In March, the ruling Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition had its worst showing ever and five bloggers were elected to seats for opposition parties (including Jeff Ooi, who has himself been sued for defamation). Following the election, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said that the BN’s "biggest mistake" in the elections was in believing the "cyberwar” was unimportant.

Global Voices Advocacy reports that a mounting crackdown on Malaysian bloggers can be expected in the wake of the August 26 by-election, in which Anwar Ibrahim won a seat in Parliament and paving the way for his effort to topple the BN coalition by mid-September. Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was reportedly one of the senior government officials who, in a meeting last week, decided to counteract criticism against them by taking bloggers to court for defamation and sedition.

Straits Times: Malaysia considering laws to rein in errant bloggers

nart — Thu, 07 Dec 2006 18:42:15 -0500

The Straits Times reports: "Malaysia may introduce tough Internet laws to control bloggers and prevent them from spreading 'disharmony, chaos, seditious material and lies' on their websites."