The nation’s top judge said that while reliance on artificial intelligence (AI) and other generative technology is growing, there are very few laws and regulations in place to regulate their use.
“This poses a problem from an ethical and cybersecurity standpoint, which warrants looking into,” she said in her opening address at the 19th conference of chief justices of Asia and the Pacific at a hotel here today.
Tengku Maimun raised concerns about the admissibility of computer-generated evidence under Section 90A of the Evidence Act 1950.
She said judges wield considerable discretion in admitting such evidence, taking into account factors such as reliability and potential bias.
“However, that provision has not been updated since 1993, unlike similar laws in other jurisdictions. Perhaps the time is ripe for legislative review,” she added.
According to Tengku Maimun, Malaysia currently lacks specific legislation against spamming and phishing, and authorities often rely on Section 233(1)(b) of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998, which criminalises anonymous communication intended to annoy, abuse, or threaten others.
“However, proving intent under this provision can be challenging, making it difficult to prosecute spamming effectively,” she said.
Tengku Maimun added that this section in the CMA is also used to address cyberbullying and harassment, but the absence of dedicated cybercrime laws has led the government to consider drafting new legislation.
She said while local cyber laws are developing, the abuse of bots, deepfake technology, the dark web and the general cloak of anonymity online also poses significant problems and risks when trying to bring offenders to book for their crimes.
“The fact that these crimes can take place digitally significantly widens the group of victims and allows for maximum damage potential long before the offender can even be identified, much less prosecuted successfully,” she added.
Tengku Maimun said the judiciary’s role to interpret and apply laws by following constitutional principles and societal values is even more critical in the digital age as technology reshapes “our legal frameworks, requiring judges to stay informed about new technologies”.
However, she added that protecting the rights of litigants remained a priority, particularly in ensuring digital evidence is obtained and handled by legal standards, safeguarding against illegal searches and upholding privacy rights.
“Promoting transparency and accountability in the collection, storage and analysis of digital evidence is also crucial to prevent misuse and ensure the ethical use of technology in the justice system,” she said.