Proposed 'online safety' law another censorship tool for Putrajaya, critics warn

Putrajaya's proposed Online Safety Bill 2024 contains draconian provisions under the guise of protecting internet users from harm, several media representatives told MalaysiaNow after a recent briefing by the relevant ministry.

The bill's main proponents, Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil and the minister in charge of law reform in the Prime Minister's Department, Azalina Othman Said, have touted it as a groundbreaking step in the fight against online bullying, fraud and other cybercrimes.

However, at a recent meeting organised by Azalina's ministry with media industry stakeholders, some questions were raised about what they see as the government's far-reaching powers in deciding what content to block.

One source said the final decision rests with the communications ministry and the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC), the internet authority behind a series of online censorship since Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim came to power in late 2022.

A list of 19 guidelines were presented at the meeting as guiding principles for the proposed law.

One of them deals with eight types of harmful content, categorised as "priority" and "non-priority".

The eight types of harmful content are child sexual abuse, intimate content shared without permission, financial scams, bullying, violence or terrorism, self-harm, hate speech and the sale of dangerous drugs.

Even then, a source told MalaysiaNow, the communications ministry could decide to block other content.

"Any content that doesn’t sit well with the minister or MCMC could still be liable, even if it doesn’t fall within the eight categories," the source added.

Azalina had previously assured that the proposed law was not aimed at restricting freedom of speech.

"How much (information) can the government remove? Remove on (platform) A, appear on (platform) B, C, and others. So how do you control 30 million users? The government cannot delete (information); it is impossible,” she was quoted as saying.

Concern over the bill is understandable and follows the government's controversial plan to license and regulate social media platforms under the pretext of combatting online harms such as cyberbullying, fraud and hate speech.

Rights activists have condemned the plan, which is widely seen as part of an ongoing crackdown on political dissent that has seen news websites and blogs being blocked, as well as authorities requesting social media platforms to take down comments critical of the government.

Earlier this year, Putrajaya admitted to making requests through MCMC for platform providers like TikTok to delete videos critical of the government.

Other platforms such as X, YouTube and Facebook have repeatedly refused the government's request to delete content in line with its free speech policy.

In June last year, MalaysiaNow was blocked for 48 hours without notice. The websites of news portals TV Pertiwi and Utusan TV were also blocked, as was a blog by former MP Wee Choo Keong.

The series of measures against the press has resulted in Malaysia dropping 34 places in the annual World Press Freedom Index, from 73rd place last year to 107th.

'MCMC has final say'

Meanwhile, the reporting mechanisms provided for in the draft Online Safety Bill have also become controversial.

The reporting mechanisms include the reporting of content by users to service providers, moderation of content by service providers and complaints to MCMC, which then instructs service providers in writing to block the content in question.

According to one source, MCMC will have the final say in deciding what content to remove or block.

"Should there be any disagreement between MCMC and the service providers as to whether certain content should be blocked, the decision of MCMC will take precedence over the decision of the service providers.

"Even if the service providers say that the reported content does not fulfil the criteria for harmful content as defined in the proposed law, they would still have to block it if MCMC insists," the same source added.

The scope of the law covers three types of service providers: application service providers (ASPs), content application service providers (CASPs) and network service providers (NSPs).

In Malaysia, well-known names for ASPs are Maxis, CelcomDigi and Telekom Malaysia.

Examples of CASPs are Media Prima, iFlix and social media platforms, while Time Dotcom and Axiata Group are examples of NSPs.

The bill provides that service providers can be prosecuted as a last resort if they fail to pay the civil penalty.

The civil penalty will be imposed on providers if they fail to fulfil their obligations under the new law and comply with MCMC's orders.

"It’s wrong to use the pretext of virtual harm protection to push a bill that can be abused and limits free speech. Wrong, plain and simple," the source said.