Saifuddin backs repealing law that could curb Net freedom

UPDATED @ 11:28:17 PM 11-08-2012 By Ida Lim August 11, 2012

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 11 ? Deputy Minister of Higher Education Datuk Saifuddin Abdullah today said he supports repealing the controversial Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950, widely seen as an attempt to curb Internet freedom, despite the clause only being four months old.
The amendment to the Evidence Act, which was passed in Parliament on April 18 after it was first tabled on April 10, is now in force after it was gazetted on July 31.

“I am all for repealing Section 114A,” Saifuddin told reporters today, saying that there should be an alternative to the legal clause.

Earlier, the Umno supreme council member had spoken at a public forum on whether Section 114A signals the end of internet freedom.

“As a Barisan Nasional guy who supports democratic reforms and… a mature democracy, I take this as a hiccup,” he said.

The other forum panellists were lawyers Faisal Moideen, Foong Cheng Leong and K. Shanmuga.

Critics have pointed out that Section 114A is too broad and contains several weaknesses, such as assuming that an administrator of a website, or an owner of a computer, is the publisher of the content unless it can be proven otherwise.

They have also pointed out that the clause is important in cases involving defamation or the Sedition Act — which the government has promised to repeal.

Although Faisal acknowledged that part of the clause was too broad when it was drafted, he said that Section 114A does not create an offence or impose a presumption of guilt.
He argued the presumption of “fact of publication” is not enough to prove one guilty in court, saying “if other elements of the crime or claim is not proven, the claim will still fail.”

He conceded that “if it is a sole element of the crime, it could be a problem.”

Shanmuga pointed out the practical results of the clause, saying that the alleged publisher would have to spend money on lawyers and suffer reputation loss due to the presumption.

“To say we can go to court and disprove the burden doesn’t reflect the reality that will be faced by an ordinary man on the street,” he said.

He also said that the Parliament had passed the proposed law within a few hours although “this was not an urgent Bill”.

Foong claimed that Section 114A “is like a tool to beat Internet users up,” saying this doesn’t match with the BN administration’s move to appeal to the Internet crowd such as the use of social network site Twitter.

The forum was jointly organised by the Bar Council’s National Young Lawyers Committee (NYLC), Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (MCCHR) and the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ).

CIJ has slammed the clause for presuming guilt instead of innocence and for making service providers liable for hosting content published by others.

The Internet Blackout Day campaign launched by CIJ will take place on this August 14.

The post Saifuddin backs repealing law that could curb Net freedom appeared first on Foong Cheng Leong.

牵制互联网自由 赛夫丁支持废114 A条文

 2012-08-11 21:07

（吉隆坡11日讯）高等教育部副部长拿督赛夫丁博士今日表明支持废除1950年证据法令下增设的114A条文，因为此条文有牵制互联网自由之意。

将向首相传达

他说，巫青团长凯利也对这项于今年在国会下议院通过的修正法令有微言，所以他将跟凯利讨论此问题，再设法向首相拿督斯里纳吉传达。

赛夫丁今日在大马律师公会礼堂出席1950年证据法令114A条文论坛时，表达了本身的立场。

这项论坛是大马律师公会年轻律师委员会、大马宪法主义及人权中心（MCCHR）和独立新闻中心（CIJ）所主办的系列批判思维论坛之一。

赛夫丁是论坛主讲人之一，另3名主讲人是律师冯正良（吉隆坡律师委员会资讯科技委员会联合主席）、宪法及人权律师K山姆卡及律师费沙慕丁。主持人马哈乐朱米。

条文一“网”打尽

114A条文的重点在于“假设出版内容是事实”（presumption offact in publication），阐明网络或网站的主人、管理人、主机、编辑订户，或者电脑或流动设备的主人，假设出版或再出版其内容。

这项广义的条文，几乎“一网打尽”个人及商业电脑用户。

除了费沙姆丁持不同看法外，赛夫丁、冯正良和K山姆卡，都认为114A条文对互联网用户造成巨大的冲击。

赛夫丁说，他支持首相倡导的政府转型计划及政治转型计划，不过却认为114A条文是问题条文。

难向民众交代

他说，政府曾经承诺不会审查互联网，但现在却实施114A文条，因此他在向民众解说时也感到棘手。

他说，在反应民众和本身对此条文的立场时，也必须同时考虑其他替代的法令，以在互联网资讯和个人利益上取得平衡。

针对费沙姆丁指有关条文，将在资讯自由流通于个人利益之间取得平衡点，赛夫丁说：“能够平衡当然是好事，不过我不确定，我们是否做到平衡，还是失衡。”

若出版内容属实 难给答辩人定罪

律师费沙姆丁认为，证据法令114A条文并非创建罪行或施加有罪的假设。

他说，假设出版内容是事实（presumption of fact in publication），是可以被推翻的，这项假定不足于证明答辩人有罪。

“如果控方或起诉人无法证明罪行的其他元素，案件一样是不能够成立的。

从“后门”送人入狱“

我不否认，条文中的一些字眼过于广义，尤其是‘提供出版便利’（开设面子书户口）这点。”

K山姆卡说，根据有关条文，被告者必须证明自己的清白，是一种由“后门”送人入狱的做法。

冯正良视有关条文为攻击互联网使用者的工具。

14日互联网中断日

他说，为了抗议此条文，多个团体将在本月14日展开互联网中断日（InternetBlackout）运动。

国内一些组织认为，114A条文颠覆了“定罪前皆属无辜”的法律原则，这法令也可能被有心人滥用来陷害他人，特别是大选即将来临之际。

净选盟受促国庆 勿在独立广场办活动

赛夫丁在回应有关净选盟计划于国庆日前夕在独立广场静坐的问题时说，当晚民众都准备欢庆国家独立纪念日，所以他请求净选盟的成员不要在当晚在独立广场举行活动。

黄衣庆国庆引混乱

他说，如果当晚恰巧着黄色衣服前来庆祝国庆日，到时将会引起混乱。

“所以，我希望净选盟不要选择在国庆日前夕及同一个地点进行活动。”

The post 牵制互联网自由 赛夫丁支持废114 A条文 appeared first on Foong Cheng Leong.

律師：被控者需負舉證責任‧114A條文太廣泛存爭議
國內 2012-08-12 09:35

（吉隆坡11日訊）多名律師認為，2012年證據法令114A條文存在許多爭議，除了可能箝制互聯網言論自由、被控者需負上舉證責任外，該條文用詞上語義過廣，涵蓋範圍也過大。

在律師公會年輕律師委員會、獨立新聞中心及大馬憲法與人權中心（MCCHR）聯辦的“證據法令114A條文：互聯網自由的終結？＂論壇上，邀請了多名律師與高等教育部副部長拿督賽夫丁擔任主講人發表對該條文的看法。

【新潮】你相信超自然力量嗎？她的照片帶有某種黑色力量…

馮正良：轉發留言或會惹禍

吉隆坡律師公會資訊工藝委員會主席馮正良指出，假設任何人利用他人電腦、互聯網戶口、wifi無限寬頻、部落格發佈違法內容，如涉及誹謗等，作為網頁設立與管理人，互聯網戶頭擁有者，就算有關內容未經同意或不知情，都會被視為內容發表者。

“一旦在114A條文下被追究責任，有關人士必須舉證證明自己清白，甚至如果你是轉發推特、面子書留言內容都可能惹禍。＂他說，在此條文下，該條文範圍過廣，無論是民事或刑事案件，舉證的責任不再歸於原告與檢控官，而是必須由被告舉證本身沒在互聯網上發表任何涉及誹謗、中傷等內容。

他呼吁反對114A條文者，參與獨立新聞中心8月14日（下週二）舉辦“網絡黑屏日＂（Internet blackout day）運動，表達不滿之聲。

山慕根：法令忽視匿名者駭客

律師、部落客及著名網站LoyarBurok創辦人K.山慕根作為論壇主講人之一就指出，114A條文的語句用詞不當，語義過廣，忽視了互聯網上存在許多匿名者，利用假戶口在留言、評論，以及存在互聯網騙案、駭客等問題。

“尤其是駭客，一旦駭入其他網民電腦或網絡戶口，利用他人的戶口進行違法事項，無辜者可能會成為代罪羔羊。＂他認為，該條文可能會被有心人士尤其是匿名者利用來進行惡意攻擊，或成為過濾互聯網內容的“工具＂，因為有關人士可針對誹謗內容對特定單位提告，而被告本身證明本身沒發佈違法內容。

法依沙：推定事實非假定有罪

另一名主講者Moideen &Max律師樓合夥人法依沙律師認為，114A條文並不全然滿佈問題，該條文確實在字面上過於廣義，但該條文只是建立一個事實推定（presumption offact），並非假定有罪。

他指出，114A條文假定這個電腦與互聯網戶口既然在某人名下，那麼利用這些通訊器材發表的內容也是由該人發表。

（星洲日報）

The post 律師：被控者需負舉證責任‧114A條文太廣泛存爭議 appeared first on Foong Cheng Leong.

I will be speaking at this event jointly organised by the Bar Council National Young Lawyers Committee, Malaysian Centre for Constitutionalism and Human Rights (“MCCHR”) and Centre for Independent Journalism (“CIJ”).

Topic: Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950
Date: 11 Aug 2012 (Saturday)
Time: 10:00 am
Venue: Raja Aziz Addruse Auditorium, First Floor, Bar Council, No 15 Leboh Pasar Besar, 50050 Kuala Lumpur

The purpose and intent of the forum is to have a general and critical discussion on the operation of section 114A, which was inserted by the Evidence (Amendment) (No. 2) Act 2012.

The forum will feature Faisal Moideen, Member of the Bar and Former Protection Assistant of United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (“UNHCR”); Foong Cheng Leong, Member of the Bar, Co-Chairperson of the KL Bar Information Technology Committee and blogger; K Shanmuga, Member of the Bar, one of the founders of LoyarBurok and a mover for UndiMsia; and Dato’ Saifuddin Abdullah, member of UMNO Supreme Council, Deputy Minister of the Ministry of Higher Education and Member of Parliament. The session will be moderated by Mahaletchumi Balakrishnan, Member of the Bar and former Co-Deputy Chairperson of the Bar Council Constitutional Law Committee.

The post Siri Pemikiran Kritis | Section 114A of the Evidence Act 1950 appeared first on Foong Cheng Leong.