'Mind your words': PAS veep warns Zahid after remarks on Kelantan
Idris also took a swipe at Zahid, asking whether he needs a map to distinguish between Kelantan and Kalimantan, or if he requires "additional classes on the Federal Constitution", whilst reminding him that Kelantan is part of Malaysia, and its people pay taxes to the federal government like everyone else...
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Malaysia needs strong commitment to maintain halal industry leadership
KUALA LUMPUR: A united approach is essential to preserve Malaysia's status as a world leader in the halal industry, according to Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. He emphasised that coordinated efforts would boost the nation's halal economy, reinforce its international market position, and create broader advantages for citizens. Ahmad Zahid, who chairs the Malaysian Halal Industry Development Council, stated these priorities emerged during a meeting on aligning the national halal agenda to shape the sector's future. 'The goal is to keep Malaysia's halal policies, strategies, and execution globally competitive and up-to-date,' he said in a Facebook post. The session, led by Ahmad Zahid, included JAKIM director-general Datuk Dr Sirajuddin Suhaimee, Halal Affairs Coordinator Datin Paduka Hakimah Mohd Yusoff, and representatives from halal ecosystem agencies. Ahmad Zahid highlighted the necessity of inter-agency collaboration to synchronise and strengthen all initiatives. 'With collective resolve and teamwork, Malaysia's halal ecosystem will remain a national asset and an international benchmark,' he added. – Bernama
Free Malaysia Today
an hour ago
- Free Malaysia Today
Unconstitutional to criminalise offensive speech made online, rules court
The Court of Appeal ruled that the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in the previous iteration of Section 233 of the CMA violates the Federal Constitution. PUTRAJAYA : The Court of Appeal has unanimously struck down as unconstitutional the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in the previous iteration of Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA), which criminalises the online transmission of offensive comments. Justice Lee Swee Seng said the words violated Article 10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution, read together with Article 8. He also said that a charge of offending and annoying a third party could not be construed as going against public order. 'We find that the impugned words of 'offensive' and 'annoy' are not a permissible restriction to the freedom of expression under our Federal Constitution. 'We therefore strike down that particular provision as constituting an offence (against the constitution),' he said in partly allowing the appeal by activist Heidy Quah to nullify the previous version of Section 233. Also on the panel hearing the appeal were Justices Hashim Hamzah and Azman Abdullah. The bench made no order as to costs as the issue at hand was a constitutional matter. Lee, who is now a Federal Court judge, said today's decision would have a prospective effect, meaning that parties in ongoing criminal proceedings under the old law could leave it to the trial judge to decide. The government passed an amendment to the CMA last year, adding the words 'grossly offensive' in constituting an offence. The amendment came into effect this February. Senior federal counsel Liew Horng Bin appeared for the government, while lawyers Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, A Surendra and New Sin Yew represented Quah. Counsel Lim Wei Jiet held a watching brief for the Clooney Foundation for Justice and Suaram. The bench also directed Liew to file a formal application to stay the decision pending the government's filing of an appeal to the Federal Court. Lee said that in a society like Malaysia's, citizens are supposed to 'give space to one another' by appreciating and accommodating their views, thoughts and ideas on a range of topics. The judge said some might use loud and lambastic language to express their views, while others might take a more scholarly and subdued tone in agreeing to disagree. 'The virtual community has a way of restoring equilibrium and even equanimity when the line has been crossed. 'To create more offences in the virtual space would be a retrogressive step bordering on needless censorship just because some people's ideas may not be so palatable,' he said. He also said that Section 233 of the CMA provided no standards as to what amounted to offensive or what would amount to an intent to annoy. 'When all types of speech could potentially be offensive if a single person finds it so, then freedom of speech has become illusory and enforcement becomes arbitrary.' Lee added that free speech would be deterred as the offence under Section 233 carried a fine of up to RM50,000, a maximum one-year jail term, or both, upon conviction. He said that would be disproportionate to the legislative aim of the CMA. 'To silence speech that is true just because some may find it offensive and annoying would be akin to using a sledgehammer to kill a fly.' Section 233(1)(a) of the CMA had made it an offence for a person to make, create, solicit or initiate the transmission of any online comment which was 'obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive' with the 'intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person'. The civil action by Quah, the founder of Refuge for Refugees, challenged the validity of the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in the provision. In July 2021, Quah was charged in the Kuala Lumpur sessions court with posting offensive online comments on Facebook highlighting the alleged mistreatment of refugees at immigration detention centres. In April 2022, the sessions court granted her a discharge not amounting to an acquittal from a charge of improper use of network facilities. This was after the trial judge accepted a preliminary objection that the charge was defective as it did not comply with the requirements of Section 233 of the CMA. She then filed a civil action for a declaration that the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in the provision were invalid and contravened two fundamental human rights safeguarded by the constitution. Her suit was, however, dismissed by the High Court.
Sinar Daily
2 hours ago
- Sinar Daily
Political leaders among the biggest threats to Constitution
'There were indications of attempts at interference towards the final period of my service.' Tengku Maimun KUALA LUMPUR – Former Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat admitted that political leaders are among the biggest threats to the Federal Constitution. She said this matter must be taken more seriously in order to safeguard the country's supreme law. "The biggest threat (to the Federal Constitution) is politicians. I don't think further elaboration is necessary,' she said during the Allianz Centre for Governance's lecture programme titled 'The Sanctity of Malaysia's Federal Constitution: Threats, Solutions and Impact on National Governance' at a hotel here on Tuesday. She said this in response to a question posed by one of the participants during the programme. Meanwhile, when asked whether she had ever faced interference from any party during her tenure, Tengku Maimun admitted that it had not happened. However, she said, signs of such attempts surfaced towards the end of her service. 'There were indications of attempts at interference towards the final period of my service,' she said. Commenting further on her responsibilities as Chief Justice, Tengku Maimun said that judgments were always based on facts and fair consideration, without being influenced by any external factors. She stressed that this principle was not only her own practice but also one she believed was upheld by other judges. 'When we are in court, we are blind (impartial). Not based on religion, race or any such considerations,' she said.
