Court orders Telegram to bar Edisi Siasat, Edisi Khas channels
Judge Mahazan Mat Taib made the prohibitory order in closed proceedings today, as confirmed by lawyer SN Nair to reporters afterwards.
The order, he said, was part of...
The Kuala Lumpur High Court has ordered Telegram to prevent the Edisi Siasat and Edisi Khas channels from disseminating harmful content that could threaten public order on the platform.
Judge Mahazan Mat Taib made the prohibitory order in closed proceedings today, as confirmed by lawyer SN Nair to reporters afterwards.
The order, he said, was part of MCMC’s ongoing suit against the three entities.
“The court granted a prohibitory injunction order, restraining all defendants and their agents, servants, or associates from further uttering, writing, or disseminating the (harmful) contents.
“This order is in effect until the disposal of the suit,” said Nair, who appeared for MCMC in the suit.
He added that the court will also hear the substantive application on Sept 24.

MCMC filed the suit against the parties on June 19, after identifying the two Telegram channels as spreading content that violated the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, which has the potential to erode public trust in institutions and affect public order.
The agency said that the platform was named as one of the defendants in the suit, deemed as the first of its kind, following its serious failure to address the harmful content.
This was despite repeated reports to Telegram and various negotiation and cooperation attempts, MCMC added.
Court documents sighted by Malaysiakini showed that MCMC claimed the two Telegram channels have published and disseminated menacing, grossly malicious statements, including doxxing individuals, especially those in public institutions.
Doxxing is publicly revealing someone’s private or identifying information online without consent, often to harass, intimidate, or harm.
“The first and second defendants (the channels) have published content designed to provoke unrest, dissatisfaction, sow distrust in government institutions and public officials, and disrupt public order.
“The third defendant (Telegram) is not merely a passive platform as it attempts to portray, but is a direct enabler and benefactor of the unchecked lawlessness that has festered within its ecosystem,” the documents read.
Apart from injunctive relief, MCMC sought general and exemplary damages from the defendants, claiming the parties ought to be punished for their outrageous conduct as a means of deterrence.
It also sought several injunction orders, including to compel the defendants to disclose all available information about the channels, as well as five percent interest per annum on the judgment sum and other relief deemed fit by the court.
Report this comment
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/06/b95ae5f7b3f8781f0797f1609aa44964.jpg)

/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/06/69e641f0127d669e5aa9c6bf0670808a.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2025/06/ac833f48dbeb473627078a7791d9b50f.jpg)
/file/publisher-c1a3f893382d2b2f8a9aa22a654d9c97/2022/12/10a8626768294dfdc9ab5836a263fdbe.jpg)
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.