KOTA KINABALU – The introduction of a law to tackle fake news related to Covid-19 be used to shield and arm the originators of such law through the royal institution among others, said the Sabah Law Society (SLS).
Its president Roger Chin said the scope of definition stated in the fake news law gives the impression that the real target is not fake news, but criticism of Putrajaya’s emergency proclamation – ostensibly to handle the Covid-19 outbreak in the country.
“The SLS is concerned that the ordinance will give rise to the perception that His Majesty may be used to shield and arm the true originators of the ordinance.
“The ordinance will erode public confidence in the fundamental institutions of this country,” he said.
“Fake news” is widely defined in the ordinance, and refers to news relating to Covid-19 or the proclamation of emergency which is wholly or partly false, in any shape or form, including forms capable of suggesting words or ideas.
Any statement is capable of being twisted to have meanings other than what was intended by the maker.
“There are already existing laws – arguably too many – to protect the public interest in the event false statements are made,” said Chin.
He also said that the law society wants the Agong to review the promulgation of the ordinance.
He said that the SLS is concerned that the rule of law is descending into rule by law and that misconstrued statements relating to the proclamation of emergency or Covid-19 is likely to cause fear and alarm.
Under the ordinance, what police deem publications containing fake news must be removed within 24 hours, failing which an offence is created.
Furthermore, orders for the removal of publications deemed to contain fake news obtained by the government of Malaysia is prejudicial or likely to be prejudicial to public order or national security – phrases which are again open to wide interpretation – cannot be set aside.
Another worrying aspect of the ordinance is that the provisions of the Evidence Act 1950 have been excluded. All evidence, however obtained, is admissible as evidence under the ordinance, even if the means of obtaining it was unlawful.
A list of documents and things seized itself can now be evidence of the existence of the documents and things seized even if not produced in court, due to the nature of the documents and things.
Extremely wide powers are given to police to seize or gain access to computerised data. It is, for example, an offence under the ordinance to refuse to surrender passwords or decryption codes.
Chin said that the ordinance also provides protection to the government of Malaysia and police officers carrying out the provisions of the ordinance in good faith.
“The above is only a sampling of the draconian provisions in the ordinance.
“The net effect of the ordinance will be to stifle free speech with no acceptable tangible benefit to the people of Malaysia.
“The ordinance provides the government of Malaysia with extremely powerful tools to cripple news portals and public bodies,” he said. – The Vibes, March 12, 2021
