Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Issues Complaint against TML

This morning, I received the following email from the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC). It carried the ominous subject title of ‘Misuse of Personal Details Without Consent‘. In essence, MCMC carried a complaint where I had referred to the grounds of judgment where the Court listed out the parties’ names. I also update below the reply I have received from MCMC.

MCMC’s email is below and where I have removed the complainant’s name.

In essence, MCMC was sending on a complaint on my earlier post on the Top 5 Company Law Cases in Malaysia for 2019 where I referred to the Court judgment which listed one of the parties’ names. MCMC made the finding that the “disclosure of his personal details and information infringes the rights and privacy of the affected individual”. This “may lead to violation of privacy and harassment.”

I have replied to MCMC. I was quite confused how there has been any violation when I referred to a Court judgment.

Any individual can lodge a complaint, whether frivolous or not, to MCMC as the regulator. But as the regulator of the communication and multimedia industry in Malaysia, officers of MCMC must properly carry out their regulatory and investigative role. They have to carry out their duties within the confines of their legal powers.

In full transparency, I also set out my response to MCMC:

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

This is a strange request. I am reporting a publicly available court judgment. Could you explain if you are insisting that the Judiciary and Judges are to also take down such judgments? Your email would then be construed as saying that the learned Judge was misusing personal details.

Please see the original judgment here at item 51.

You can click on the link to item 51 to access the original judgment of the court.

This judgment is also reported in the various law journals already. I have attached the judgments as found in www.cljlaw.com and in lexisnexis.com. These are legal databases that lawyers and subscribers access for reported cases. Could you refer this on to your in-house legal counsel as well for them to understand legal judgments and court decisions.

To make this clearer to you and the complainant, I have now changed the link on my website to directly link to the Judiciary’s website for the judgment. This is a public document and the Judiciary’s document.

Could you cite for me what legal provision MCMC is relying on to prevent judges, lawyers, and individuals from referring to publicly available court judgments found on the Judiciary’s official website? I would like to know your response on the record so that I can forward it on to the Judiciary as well.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

*UPDATE*

After I sent off my reply, MCMC replied to me the same day. They are withdrawing their complaint and their request for me to take down any content. MCMC acknowledges that I was referring to a publicly available court judgment.

 

I take this matter as closed between MCMC and The Malaysian Lawyer.

Leave a Reply