Ismail Sabri questions new 3R laws, backs free speech

Ismail Sabri questions new 3R laws, backs free speech

The former prime minister is concerned that any new legislation will be used by the government to stifle dissent.

Ismail Sabri Yaakob said he met with members of the media recently and they had raised concerns about freedom of speech.
PETALING JAYA:
Former prime minister Ismail Sabri Yaakob has questioned the appropriateness of introducing a law to deal with issues related to religion, race and royalty (3R), as announced by law and institutional reform minister Azalina Othman Said.

He also asked whether the law will guarantee freedom of speech and be free from government manipulation.

“I am afraid this new law will restrict freedom of speech, particularly for the media, which serves as the eyes and ears of the people to ensure better governance by the government.

“Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that certain Acts – such as the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA) and certain sections of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA) – need to be reviewed,” he wrote in his column in Utusan Malaysia.

Last month, Azalina was reported to have said the government is studying the possibility of introducing a Racial Harmony Act aimed at penalising people who manipulate 3R issues.

Ismail said he met with members of the media recently and they had raised concerns about freedom of speech.

The Bera MP said the media, as the “fourth estate”, cannot be controlled anymore since almost everyone has access to social media, where information is disseminated rapidly.

“The media already practises self-censorship on sensitive issues to ensure national security.”

He said the government must also be prepared for the digital explosion, primarily through social media, which has given rise to groups like influencers and cybertroopers.

Before 2018, he said certain groups were using cybertroopers to attack the government, but no action was taken against them, unlike now where social media users are restricted because their ideas do not align with those of the government.

“This action restrains the right and freedom of speech, and is inappropriate.

“If there is an element of defamation or slander that threatens public order, the individuals involved should be brought to court using existing laws,” he said.

Stay current - Follow FMT on WhatsApp, Google news and Telegram

Subscribe to our newsletter and get news delivered to your mailbox.