Addressing concerns over potential abuse of power, Saifuddin said enforcement officials need to operate within the boundaries of the law.
“It’s not about any Tom, Dick and Harry being asked to hand over their phone,” he told reporters here.
“Police must have a clear basis, such as intelligence suggesting an individual is involved in criminal activities, to conduct such checks.
“There are laws in place and police must act within their scope.”
Saifuddin also urged the public to lodge a police report if they feel their phone was checked without a valid reason by any police officer.
“There are 395,000 police reports made monthly. There is nothing stopping them,” he said.
Saifuddin was speaking to the media after checking preparations for the Asia International Security Summit and Expo (AISSE 2025) to be held from tomorrow to Jan 22 at Putrajaya International Convention Centre.
Inspector-General of Police Razarudin Husain had claimed on Monday that police can go through a person’s mobile phone if they suspect a crime has been committed.
Razarudin said police officers with the rank of inspector or higher have the authority to check a person’s handphone under the Criminal Procedure Code and the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.
Rights group Lawyers for Liberty rebutted Razarudin’s claim, calling it “legally untenable” and a threat to civil liberties.
It said police cannot check mobile phones except in the course of an ongoing investigation or search.
The Human Rights Commission of Malaysia (Suhakam) yesterday urged the government to clarify Razarudin’s claim.
It described his statement as troubling and said police cannot be allowed to inspect a person’s phone in an arbitrary manner.
Saifuddin said today he will ask Razarudin to discuss the matter with Suhakam.
“It is important for Suhakam to understand the scope of what the police can and cannot do, and to help educate the public on this matter,” he said.
He said there needs to be a balance between security and human rights, pointing out that while intelligence may sometimes point to an individual as a suspect in terrorism-related activity, the existing laws might limit police action.
“Intelligence might suggest that a person poses a security risk, but the law does not currently allow us to check their devices. This is why there is a need for specific legal provisions to address such situations.
“It’s about ensuring actions are not taken indiscriminately. Police must act based on intelligence and legal grounds,” he said.