ONI Country Profi le
329
bloggers who allegedly made disparaging comments about the involvement of a royal
head of state in a tussle between BN and PR for control of a state government.
60 Two
bloggers have since pled guilty. They had to pay fi nes of MYR 10,000 and MYR 8,000
(approximately USD 3,260 and USD 2,600), respectively. The other suits are still
pending.
61 Similarly, in September 2010, Irwan Abdul Rahman, who started a satirical
tongue-in-cheek blog mimicking The Onion News Network, was hauled up before the
courts for the same offense after he posted a story highly critical of Tenaga Nasional
Berhad, the country ’ s main, state-owned energy provider.
62
In the years since the 2008 elections, the incumbent BN has avoided repeating its
2008 mistake of ignoring the Internet and losing the digital race for votes.
63 Numerous
by-elections since 2008 have seen BN effectively mobilizing online support, and its
followers, dubbed “ cybertroopers, ” have allegedly launched smear campaigns against
Pakatan Rakyat candidates.
64 These are strongly reminiscent of government-sponsored
information campaigns launched in other countries, such as Russia, China, and Iran.
65
On a constructive front, there are also signs of the Malaysian government using the
Internet to engage with its electorate: thousands of citizens responded to the prime
minister ’ s invitation for suggestions on the proposed 2011 national budget on his
blog.
66
Surveillance
There is no express constitutional right to privacy in Malaysia, and the courts have
declined to recognize it in common law.
67 Notwithstanding the absence of constitutional protection, the long-awaited Personal Data Protection Bill was passed in April
2010, prohibiting dissemination of personal information without consent in commercial transactions.
68 However, this act is severely limited because state action is
expressly excluded from its scope.
69
On the fl ipside, there are a wide range of legislative provisions empowering unsupervised and unreviewable governmental seizure and detention of information. The
CMA criminalizes unlawful interception of communications but in the same breath
requires ISPs to implement interception capabilities if required by a minister.
70 It also
permits the MCMC to seize and retain, for as long as deemed necessary, any documents
obtained pursuant to its investigations.
71 The Computer Crimes Act of 1997 and AntiCorruption Act of the same year respectively permit a police inspector or the public
prosecutor to dispense with judicial warrants in carrying out searches and seizures of
electronic data for investigating cybercrimes or corruption where deemed reasonably
necessary.
72 No subsequent judicial warrant is required under either act. In addition
to these computer- and Internet-specifi c powers, the ISA is always available as a legal
backstop, justifying searches, seizures, and detention in the name of national
security.
73
329
bloggers who allegedly made disparaging comments about the involvement of a royal
head of state in a tussle between BN and PR for control of a state government.
60 Two
bloggers have since pled guilty. They had to pay fi nes of MYR 10,000 and MYR 8,000
(approximately USD 3,260 and USD 2,600), respectively. The other suits are still
pending.
61 Similarly, in September 2010, Irwan Abdul Rahman, who started a satirical
tongue-in-cheek blog mimicking The Onion News Network, was hauled up before the
courts for the same offense after he posted a story highly critical of Tenaga Nasional
Berhad, the country ’ s main, state-owned energy provider.
62
In the years since the 2008 elections, the incumbent BN has avoided repeating its
2008 mistake of ignoring the Internet and losing the digital race for votes.
63 Numerous
by-elections since 2008 have seen BN effectively mobilizing online support, and its
followers, dubbed “ cybertroopers, ” have allegedly launched smear campaigns against
Pakatan Rakyat candidates.
64 These are strongly reminiscent of government-sponsored
information campaigns launched in other countries, such as Russia, China, and Iran.
65
On a constructive front, there are also signs of the Malaysian government using the
Internet to engage with its electorate: thousands of citizens responded to the prime
minister ’ s invitation for suggestions on the proposed 2011 national budget on his
blog.
66
Surveillance
There is no express constitutional right to privacy in Malaysia, and the courts have
declined to recognize it in common law.
67 Notwithstanding the absence of constitutional protection, the long-awaited Personal Data Protection Bill was passed in April
2010, prohibiting dissemination of personal information without consent in commercial transactions.
68 However, this act is severely limited because state action is
expressly excluded from its scope.
69
On the fl ipside, there are a wide range of legislative provisions empowering unsupervised and unreviewable governmental seizure and detention of information. The
CMA criminalizes unlawful interception of communications but in the same breath
requires ISPs to implement interception capabilities if required by a minister.
70 It also
permits the MCMC to seize and retain, for as long as deemed necessary, any documents
obtained pursuant to its investigations.
71 The Computer Crimes Act of 1997 and AntiCorruption Act of the same year respectively permit a police inspector or the public
prosecutor to dispense with judicial warrants in carrying out searches and seizures of
electronic data for investigating cybercrimes or corruption where deemed reasonably
necessary.
72 No subsequent judicial warrant is required under either act. In addition
to these computer- and Internet-specifi c powers, the ISA is always available as a legal
backstop, justifying searches, seizures, and detention in the name of national
security.
73