/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/07/3a6b3e4eb148de9d227e1d83e8eb5b0b.jpg)
Court's grounds for striking down 'offensive', 'annoy' provisions
The landmark ruling emerged from activist Heidy Quah’s successful challenge to Section 233, which previously allowed prosecution for online content deemed offensive or annoying.
A three-member judicial panel...
Two words have been declared unconstitutional by Malaysia’s appellate court - “offensive” and “annoys” - effectively neutering key provisions of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.
The landmark ruling emerged from activist Heidy Quah’s successful challenge to Section 233, which previously allowed prosecution for online content deemed offensive or annoying.
A three-member judicial panel led by judge Lee Swee Seng, alongside judges Hashim Hamzah and Azman Abdullah, upheld Quah’s constitutional challenge filed in September 2021.
The legal proceedings stemmed from Quah’s July 2021 prosecution over social media posts criticising refugee treatment at immigration centres.
The court’s rationale centred on proportionality - ruling that mere offence or annoyance cannot constitute threats to public order sufficient to justify curtailing constitutional free speech protections.
It must be noted that, as the Act was amended in December 2024, the ruling today only affects the old version.
The detailed 54-page decision is accessible below.
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/07/17684388b9af871e3a68901acbfb4295.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2021/07/3d0eb61dfa9c9785c54aef3c90ad7338.jpg)
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.