Heidy Quah Gaik Li, who filed the suit last week, is seeking an order that the words “offensive” and “annoy” in Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act be invalidated for being unconstitutional

An online case management will be held at the Shah Alam High Court on Sept 14, the Malay Mail reported.

Under Section 233(1)(a), a person who makes, creates or solicits, and initiates the transmission of any online comment which is “obscene, indecent, false, menacing or offensive” with “intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person” commits an offence.

Those found guilty could be fined up to RM50,000, or face a maximum one-year jail term or both.

Court papers revealed that Quah is taking the position that Section 233, which makes online offensive content a crime, is not a “restriction” under Article 10(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution, but is a “prohibition”.

Article 10(1) of the Federal Constitution guarantees all citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression.

However, Article 10(2)(a) allows Parliament to impose “restrictions” on grounds of national security, public order or morality, to protect parliamentary privileges, or to provide against contempt of court, defamation or incitement to any offence.

Quah, who is the founder of Refuge for Refugees, was charged last month under Section 233 over a Facebook post last year on alleged mistreatment of refugees at immigration detention centres.

Her trial in the sessions court has not started.