Latest news with #KokilaVaaniVadiveloo
The Star
02-08-2025
- Politics
- The Star
Open by default
WHEN the explosion and fire shook a residential area in Putra Heights, Selangor, in early April this year, residents were left not just with anxiety and trauma but also with lingering doubts. Even after the investigation by the Occupational Safety and Health Department – which was made public in June – revealed that ground instability was what led to the gas pipeline explosion, and the police subsequently classified the case as 'No Further Action', residents continue to grapple with unresolved questions, calling on the government to provide them with answers. Why did the explosion happen only there? What about the construction of shop lots near the pipeline's location? And why is it so difficult to access such information? Incidents like this reveal a deeper truth that access to information is not just a tool for journalists or watchdogs – it can affect the lives of everyday Malaysians too. This is one reason why advocates say it is important the government keeps its promise to table a Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill in Parliament soon. FOI supporters say the law could empower citizens in ways that extend far beyond politics and media; from holding the government accountable for safety and land use decisions, to improving services through smarter, more transparent data sharing. Changing the mindset Lawyer and former Selangor Bar chairman Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo says a federal FOI law would benefit ordinary citizens seeking information about government activities that directly affect them, including issues of environmental hazards, land use, and healthcare policies. She cites the example of a notable judgment in 2023 involving a High Court order that required the government to release an accident investigation report about a plane crash that killed 11 people almost half a century ago in 1976. 'This case illustrated how families struggled to access information without FOI provisions,' she says. But beyond that, she says it could also help so many segments of society, such as students and researchers wanting to carry out evidence-based analysis, small business owners who may need to investigate regulations and obtain contract information, or legal professionals looking to gain evidence or background for court cases. Kokila says in South Africa, for example, environmental groups and minority shareholders have used FOI laws to obtain critical information on corporate projects affecting their interests. 'FOI is recognised as a consumer right to enable informed choices,' Kokila says. State and culture The Malaysian public has a right to know how the government conducts activities that shape daily lives, stresses senior manager (research) for the Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas), Alissa Rode. Because of the lack of an FOI law, she says only seven out of the 13 states and territories published their annual budget estimates online as of 2024. 'Expenditure information should be considered critical information that is proactively disclosed, but failing that, a minimal right to information would enable citizens to obtain this information,' she says. This also shows that it is important for an FOI law to be adopted by all states, not just at the federal level, she adds, as state governments also possess data that is important to the average citizen. Sinar Project coordinator Khairil Yusof points out that two states – Penang and Selangor – already have FOI laws at the state level. From their interactions with the two state governments, he says the implementation of an FOI law creates not only a legal change, but also a change in culture within the government from being the gatekeeper of information to an 'open by default' approach. 'The cultural change is the under-standing that government information and knowledge resources are publicly funded and that they should be freely available and accessible to the public. 'It also creates an enabling environment for government agencies to proactively share public information and data, not just with the public but also between government agencies,' says Khairil. In practice, existing laws and bureau-cracy often hinder this as government officials are prevented from sharing information with the public. There is a provision in the Penal Code, Section 203A, which Khairil describes as being 'very vague', that discourages civil servants from sharing information. Section 203A states that it is a crime for civil servants to disclose any information obtained by them in the performance of their duties under any written law. 'So often, even if the information requested is not secret, it requires a lot of additional work for both parties to share that information. 'For example, the cleanliness of rivers that the officer already had on their computer.' Indirect beneficiary Another main obstacle to information access in Malaysia is the Official Secrets Act (OSA), as Rode points out. The OSA makes all information confidential by default. 'Without an FOI law, a citizen seeking information would commonly get shunted around the bureaucracy looking for a sympathetic and empowered officer, as there is no obligation on the part of public officials to meet the request or even reveal who is responsible for that data. 'Even if the department in question is willing to provide the data, requests are often deprioritised,' she says. Kokila adds that without FOI protections, any whistleblower disclosing public interest information becomes at risk of prosecution and their disclosures often end up being suppressed by secrecy laws. Thus, Rode says, although an FOI law should at minimum mandate passive disclosure – that is, information is provided upon request – countries with the highest standards of transparency would go one step further and embrace active disclosure and an 'open by default' approach to information. 'Ideally, the upcoming FOI law should set up the expectation that critical information is made available online by default. Exceptions can still be made for security and privacy purposes, but such exceptions should be narrowly defined,' she says. Is there hope? Khairil says there are already examples in Malaysia of a more 'open by default' approach to data collected by the government, such as the Health Ministry's Covid-Now dashboard, the Department of Statistics's OpenDOSM portal, and the Public Sector Open Data initiatives. The results of such initiatives have shown that beyond governance and rights issues, an FOI law also immediately paves the way for an open government and unlocks the full value of the work done by the civil service by making public information open by default. 'It enables rapid digital transformation innovations not only for the governments, but for everyone,' says Khairil. But usually, the general public is an indirect beneficiary of access to information, mostly without realising it, he says, providing what he calls a relatable example: Local councils like the Petaling Jaya City Council and the Subang Jaya City Council do spot checks and grade restaurant cleanliness; the rating is displayed on the inspected premises. 'If this dataset were publicly available, then companies like Google, FoodPanda, or Grab could incorporate these grades in their apps.' To drive home the point of how much the people take the indirect benefits of open data for granted, Khairil points to a global example; the GPS system used worldwide is only possible because the United States government made it public. 'Imagine a world where only limited people could have access to GPS navigation.'
Sinar Daily
02-08-2025
- Sinar Daily
Dear parents, take bullying seriously: Legal steps you can take immediately
WHEN a child is bullied, every second counts and waiting for authorities can mean waiting too long. Legal experts are urging parents to take immediate action themselves, using existing laws to protect their children before harm escalates. The case of 13-year-old Zara Qairina, who endured repeated bullying, has amplified calls for parents to intervene without delay. Former Child Rights Chairperson of the Bar Council, Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo, said families have more legal tools at their disposal than they might realise. "Parents often believe they must wait for police action or school intervention, but that is not true. There are immediate legal steps that can protect the child's safety and well-being right away," Kokila said. The most critical first step is evidence gathering. Kokila emphasised that detailed documentation can make or break a case. "Record every incident which is dates, times, names and witnesses. Preserve text messages, social media posts, photographs and medical reports. If there are injuries, obtain an official medical report immediately,' she advised. According to her, such documentation not only strengthens legal claims but also ensures the matter is taken seriously by schools and institutions. Kokila further said parents should submit a formal written complaint to the school administration or principal, demanding a written response. "If the school does not act, escalate to the board of governors, the Education Ministry or district education offices. Keep a paper trail of every letter and reply," Kokila said. She also encouraged parents to request access to their child's school records and any incident reports to assess whether proper procedures were followed. Even without immediate police involvement, Kokila said parents have access to legal protections designed to safeguard the victim and deter further harm. Kokila explained that the law provides several avenues for urgent relief, which can be pursued directly through the courts. "Applications for protection or restraining orders can be filed at a magistrate's court. Civil suits can also be considered against the bully, the school, or responsible adults for negligence. These steps are independent of any criminal investigation," she added. Former Child Rights Chairperson of the Bar Council, Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo, said families have more legal tools at their disposal than they might realise. Photo: Canva The Esha Clause: A Turning Point in Bullying Laws Malaysia's recent Esha Clause, named after social media influencer Rajeswary Appahu, known as Esha, who died following severe cyberbullying, has strengthened protections for victims. Under Section 507D(2) of the Penal Code, anyone whose harassment or bullying provokes a person to harm themselves or commit suicide can face up to 10 years in prison, a fine, or both. 'The Esha Clause addresses the psychological damage of bullying, holding perpetrators accountable even if their intent is not proven. This is especially important in cases like Zara's, where the emotional toll is severe,' Kokila said. Malaysia's decriminalisation of attempted suicide in 2023 means victims will no longer face punishment, shifting focus to mental health support and accountability for perpetrators. 'If Zara had taken her own life, the legal focus would be on whether bullying contributed. Families could pursue wrongful death or negligence claims against individuals or institutions that failed to act,' Kokila said. Other countries such as Singapore, the UK, New Zealand and Australia have adopted similar approaches, pairing legal accountability with mental health care. While legal avenues are critical, Kokila also sees value in preventive measures. 'In New Zealand, family group conferences allow victims, bullies, and families to resolve conflicts under professional guidance. These programmes have reduced repeat offences and addressed underlying causes,' she said. Commenting further, former Malaysian Bar president Salim Bashir highlighted the urgent need for comprehensive legal measures to address bullying, pointing out that Malaysia still lacks a dedicated anti-bullying statute. Despite this gap, he stressed that existing laws under the Penal Code, tort law and other provisions can still offer protection and remedies to victims. 'Bullying whether physical, verbal or online can have devastating consequences. It is not confined to bruises and physical injuries; emotional and psychological trauma can be equally severe. While a dedicated anti-bullying law would certainly help to define and address the problem more holistically, victims are not without legal recourse,' Salim said. He explained that under current law, cases involving bodily harm can be prosecuted under provisions of the Penal Code dealing with causing hurt or criminal intimidation. On the civil side, Salim pointed out that victims can commence tort actions, particularly claims for assault or negligence. 'A civil suit in court can be filed if it can be shown that the defendant owed a duty of care to the victim, that the harm was foreseeable and that the injury whether physical, emotional or reputational, resulted directly from the defendant's conduct,' he explained.
The Star
20-07-2025
- Politics
- The Star
Striking a proper legal balance
PETALING JAYA: Significant changes to the Peaceful Assembly Act 2012 (Act 736) will mark a key test of the government's commitment to upholding civil liberties, say legal experts. With that in mind, some have urged the government to strike a proper balance between the people's right to hold peaceful protests and the authorities' need to maintain public order. All eyes will be on proposed amendments to the Act during the current parliamentary session, with the government having pledged to remove impediments towards the right to peaceful assembly. Act 736 regulates public assemblies, including protests, and outlines the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, while also establishing restrictions deemed necessary for public order and security. Key aspects have included a requirement for organisers to notify the police of an intended assembly, restrictions on street protests and specific rules regarding prohibited places. Lawyer Kokila Vaani Vadiveloo welcomed the proposed removal of Section 11, which requires protest organisers to obtain the consent of the venue owner. She said this is in line with the recent Federal Court ruling that struck down the requirement which penalised organisers who failed to give five days' notice, with the apex court ruling it as unconstitutional. While police notification under Section 9(1) remains a requirement, Kokila said the court ruling makes it no longer criminally enforceable. 'This does not weaken public order. The court acknowledged public order as a legitimate concern but found Section 9(5) to be disproportionate,' said the former Selangor Bar chairman. Kokila said the authorities still hold powers under other parts of the Act and the Penal Code to manage assemblies. 'Public safety can be maintained without criminalising peaceful conduct,' she added. Kokila proposed reframing Section 9(1) as a recommended, not mandatory, requirement and removing Section 11 or replacing it with a presumptive right to public space with limited exceptions. She said the proposed removal of Section 11 does not mean anyone could protest anywhere without permission as it only applies to public spaces, not private property. 'Private venue owners still have the full legal right to deny access to their premises. 'If someone were to hold a protest on private land without the owner's consent, it could amount to trespass and the owner may seek legal remedies, including injunction or removal,' she added. If properly implemented, Kokila said the reforms would better align the country's public law with democratic norms and affirm the judiciary's role in safeguarding rights. Echoing this view, lawyer Lim Wei Jiet said the amendments should move Malaysia away from a system based on 'permission' towards one which facilitates peaceful assemblies. 'We have yet to see the draft, so the devil is in the details,' he added. Senior lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdulla, however, cautioned that eliminating the need to notify the police could complicate rally management. He said assemblies held in public spaces still require traffic control and crowd management and without notice, the police will not be able to prepare or even inform the public. He also noted that having a police presence will help assure both rally participants and the public. 'Although the proposed amendments are welcomed, is it not wise for the organisers to still notify the police in advance to ensure the safety and security of those who turn up for the assembly and also bystanders? 'I believe the general public will also want to know earlier as they may have plans to pass by the area or attend an event there,' he said, adding that he agreed with Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, who had raised these concerns. Mohamed Haniff said police could still seek a court injunction to stop a protest if there are substantial concerns about public safety. Beyond Section 11, several lawyers have called for other changes. Lawyer Andrew Khoo pointed out that since the Act's introduction in 2012, only one designated protest site has been gazetted – Darul Makmur Stadium in Kuantan – under Section 25. 'Every town and city should have such designated places, and a city should have more than one spot where people can gather for peaceful assembly,' he said. Khoo called for the removal of restrictions in Section 4, which bars non-citizens, those under 21 years of age and children from participating in assemblies. 'The age limit is inconsistent with Malaysia's commitments under the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,' he said. Khoo added that Sections 5 and 12, which allow third parties to object to a protest, could unfairly undermine the right to assemble. Association of Women Lawyers vice-president Denise Lim said the recent Federal Court ruling and moratorium on Section 11 investigations are positive developments, but urged close scrutiny on fresh amendments. 'The key is whether other restrictive provisions remain or whether new forms of regulations might replace repealed ones.'Transparency, meaningful stakeholder engagement and rights-based drafting should be made central to this process,' she said. Lim added that legal reforms should be consistently and fairly implemented, as whether an individual is truly able to exercise his or her rights depends on the law being implemented proportionately without fear of retaliation or creating excessive hurdles.
