While the move is aimed at protecting children online, experts say it is less about limiting screen time and more about whether young users are ready to navigate the digital environment independently.
“At the age of 16, adolescents generally possess a higher level of cognitive maturity, enabling them to make more informed judgements about right and wrong,” said NUTP secretary-general Fouzi Singon.
He said younger students tend to take content at face value, as they lack the ability to critically evaluate what they encounter online.
“Students below 16 tend to accept what is presented to them without critically evaluating the situation,” he said.
The World Health Organization defines adolescence as the period between ages 10 to 19, a stage of rapid cognitive and psychosocial development, during which individuals are more vulnerable to peer influence and manipulation.
From a developmental perspective, counsellor Dr Anasuya Jegathevi Jegathesan said younger adolescents often possess more rigid thinking patterns.
“Younger adolescents tend to think in more concrete ways, making them more likely to trust and believe what they are told,” she said.
“As they get older, their thinking becomes more complex, and they are better able to question intentions and recognise manipulation.”
Under the upcoming policy, individuals under 16 will not be allowed to independently create or manage social media accounts, although access remains possible through parent-managed profiles.
The approach has been described as a delay in independent use rather than a blanket ban – mirroring a similar move by Australia in December last year, which reportedly led to the removal of 4.7 million underage accounts.
Experts say the age 16 represents a practical tipping point, where teenagers begin to develop stronger impulse control and risk awareness.
“Allowing digital account ownership only at 16 can significantly reduce the risk of negative behaviour, particularly exposure to harmful content and cyberbullying,” Fouzi said.
Anasuya added that delaying access could serve as a safeguard during a critical developmental phase.
However, Amnani A Kadir of Protect and Save the Children believes that while the policy is a step in the right direction, it does not address deeper issues.
“This is a protective step but not sufficient on its own. A strict age limit does not reflect differences in maturity, exposure and digital literacy,” she said.
She warned that restricting access without addressing how children actually use digital platforms could lead to unintended consequences.
Amnani also cautioned against over-reliance on parental supervision, noting that many families may lack the time or resources to consistently monitor online activity.
“Protection must come from safer platform design, digital education and trust-based engagement – not surveillance alone,” she said.
Anasuya agreed, saying digital readiness must be deliberately taught, both in schools and through parenting support, to help families better understand how young people should engage with online spaces.