Lawyers group Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) today questioned a statement by the communications and digital minister against "inaccurate" and "slanderous" information following complaints of restrictions on a number of websites and social media channels since June this year.

Fahmi Fadzil had made the remarks in an apparent bid to justify the series of restrictions.

He reportedly said that while media freedom and the freedom of speech were guaranteed, this did not mean the freedom to spread slander and inaccurate information.

"In general, I can say that we cannot allow any false or slanderous information touching on the 3R issues (religion, royalty and race) to be manipulated by any party," he was reported as saying on Aug 19.

LFL however said that the right to freedom of speech was laid out in Article 10 (1)(a) of the Federal Constitution and could not be restricted on grounds of inaccuracy.

"The restrictions to freedom of speech allowed under Article 10(2)(a) do not encompass inaccurate statements," it said.

"It is speech that is prejudicial to public order or security that can be restricted, and that is a high bar to fulfil."

In a statement, LFL director Zaid Malek also described Fahmi's remark as "a transparent attempt to justify or lay the groundwork for blocking portals or websites critical of the government".

"It is disturbing and unconstitutional for the minister to set himself up as the arbiter of 'truth' and arrogate powers to himself to restrict supposedly slanderous or inaccurate news," he said.

"Slanderous or inaccurate according to whom? Is it only the government’s right to decide what is true?"

He also reminded Fahmi of the Anti-Fake News Act, repealed by the first Pakatan Harapan (PH) government in 2018 as a threat to the freedom of speech.

"Fake news must be countered by explanation, not criminalised," he said.

"If the government gets to decide what is inaccurate or slanderous, it will lead to abuse of power and the jailing of political opponents. Our past history has proven this is so, time and time again."

He likewise recalled how Section 500 of the Penal Code was used by the Barisan Nasional government to bring "politically motivated charges" against PH leaders.

"PH had then criticised the law. Now in power, has Fahmi forgotten this?"

Zaid said that such powers, if allowed, could restrict discourse on matters of public interest as the government could "twist" the definition of slander and inaccuracy to suit its own purposes.

"Political opponents, government detractors, activists and the general public would be unusually burdened to prove any allegations of fault against the government if this were allowed.

"The 1MDB debacle is a clear example of how such powers can be easily abused by the government, where news portals were blocked and individuals were charged for speaking up.

"There is no reason to believe such abuses would not happen under this government or any other government," he said.