Malaysia’s Court of Appeal has unanimously ruled that the previous version of Section 233 of the 1998 Communications and Multimedia Act, which allowed convictions based on the words “offensive” or “annoying,” is unconstitutional, striking down these terms as invalid.
Judge Datuk Lee Swee Seng stated that the wording violated Articles 10(2)(a) and 8 of the Federal Constitution, and prosecutions based solely on causing offense or annoyance cannot be interpreted as a threat to public order. “We believe the terms ‘offensive’ and ‘annoying’ are not permissible restrictions under the Constitution on freedom of speech. Therefore, we declare these provisions unconstitutional and remove them,” he said.
The Court of Appeal made the ruling while partially allowing social activist Khoo Yu Lili’s appeal to strike down the outdated Section 233. The bench also included Judges Datuk Hashim Hamzah and Datuk Azman Abdullah. Due to the constitutional nature of the appeal, no legal costs were imposed.
Lee, now elevated to Federal Court Judge, explained that the ruling has forward-looking significance: ongoing cases under the old law will now be left to trial judges to exercise discretion.
The government had amended the law last year, replacing “offensive” with “grossly offensive,” which officially took effect in February this year.
Representing the government in this case was Senior Federal Counsel Liew Horng Bin (phonetic), while Khoo’s legal team included Datuk Marliah Indira, Su Rendira, and Leong Sin You. Lawyer Lim Wei Jiet also attended on behalf of the Khairuni Judicial Foundation and Suaram.
The Court of Appeal also ordered Liew to formally submit an application to stay the ruling, allowing the government to appeal to the Federal Court.
Khoo described the ruling as a historic victory for Malaysia, marking a key milestone for democracy and freedom of speech. Khoo, who received the Queen’s Young Leader Award from Queen Elizabeth II in 2017, praised the exceptional bench and her outstanding legal team for making this day possible. She called the decision a “historic moment” and emphasized that it represents a major step forward in defending democratic rights and freedom of expression in the country.
