THE Federal Court has ruled that the words 'offensive' with the intent to 'annoy' in Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 are valid and constitutional.
The decision was reached unanimously by a five-judge panel led by Chief Justice Datuk Seri Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, who sat with Federal Court judges Tan Sri Nallini Pathmanathan, Datuk Che Mohd. Ruzima Ghazali, Datuk Mohd. Nazlan Mohd. Ghazali and Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
Section 233 of the CMA had made it an offence for any person to make, create, solicit or initiate the online transmission of any “obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive” comment with the intent to “annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person”.
On Aug 27 last year, the Court of Appeal unanimously struck down the section, ruling that it violated Articles 8 and 10(2)(a) of the constitution, which provides for equality before the law, while Article 10(2)(a) permits certain limitations to free speech.
The government had appealed against the Court of Appeal's decision relating to a lawsuit brought by activist Heidy Quah.
Quah filed an originating summons to declare the words in the law provision as null and void after she was charged in court under Section for her Facebook posting.
Nallini, who read today's decision, said that the purpose of Section 233(1)(a) of the CMA was to regulate the improper use of network facilities and services, with a view to providing a safe online environment.
"It serves to protect individuals and communities from suffering harm as a result of such improper use. In other words, Section 233(1)(a) targets communications that fall outside the purview of the freedom of speech and expression.
"Therefore, it does not have the effect of infringing that right as guaranteed under Article 10(1)(a)," she said. - February 6, 2026
