Page 1

CPPS Policy Fact sheet: Internet Policing

CPPS is pleased to bring you its “ CPPS Policy Fact Sheet ” on Internet policing . In this fact sheet we will review Internet policing, specifically Internet monitoring and censorship. You can access all CPPS policy factsheets here and here .

BACKGROUND

The development of Internet as an important means of communication has led to an interesting and contradictory scenario. There are numerous Internet crimes being committed such as data thefts, cyberattacks on critical information systems, child sexual abuse images, internet fraud, identity theft and intellectual property crime (trademark counterfeiting and copyright piracy). Internet crimes are criminal offences that are facilitated via the means of communication devises in a network (the Internet).

This then led to the birth of Internet police , which is a term for organizations (not necessarily from the police force or secret police departments) in charge of policing the Internet . The role is not restricted to curbing the crimes mentioned above but also to monitor and censor the online public opinion. Internet police is to patrol its networks and is constantly upgrading software to filter sites . Several technologies are employed to censor the Internet such as caching, blacklisting domain name or IP address , or simply redirection to a government homepage . Blacklisting the website is beneficial for this kind of web censorship as the webmasters would be unaware of own website blockage.

While the need for internet policing is can be justified in terms of curbing online fraud; their role in censoring and regulating online public opinion can be construed as obstructing the Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of rights to freedom of opinion and expression. It is the right to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers. FLASHPOINTS

• In January 1997, Tun Mahathir promised investors that the Multimedia Super Corridor (MSC) would have “the world’s best soft infrastructure of supporting laws, policies, and practices” including a 10-point Multimedia Bill of Guarantees. • Officials clarified that the policy did not grant any individuals blanket immunity from ’s security laws. If someone presented seditious or libelous content to Malaysian audiences, action could be taken under existing laws that applied to television . The information ministry or the home ministry usually issues such threats. • On August 11, 1998, Malaysian police detained two people suspected of spreading rumors of riots over the Internet in a case that officials say highlights the fears of racial and social strife. Both were detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA ). • More than a dozen anti-Mahathir websites were taken off the web due to materials deemed hateful or defamatory in March 2001. This was not by the government, but by Tripod, a free hosting service owned by Lycos INC of the United States and the content breached Tripod’s rules and regulation. It is not known whether the notification was initiated by a government complaint. • Malaysiakini was shut down for half a day in January 2003 due to their computers being seized. This was due to a police investigation of Malaysiakini publishing an allegedly seditious letter. • In 2007, the number of Internet subscribers in Malaysia was more than five million . With wireless LAN representing 21% of all broadband subscriptions in 2007. • Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan said that Malaysian and Thailand police are collaborating in efforts to map out new strategies to cyber crimes such as credit card fraud and scams (August 5, 2008). • To date, access to 127 websites and blogs including Malaysia Today have been blocked for contravening various sections of the Act. (, Aug 30 2008) STAKEHOLDERS Page 2 The Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission was initially the regulator for the converging communications and multimedia industry but later on became involved with the role of converging industries of telecommunications, broadcasting and online activities .

The Ministry of Energy, Water and Communications regulates the communication sector through the MCMC.

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have a rather fluid status that arises from the fact that although they are physically located in a particular jurisdiction, they usually function in a transnational way. ISP is a company that offers their customers’ access to the Internet using dial-up or other means of data communication (DSL, broadband wireless access, ethernet)

The Internet users as individuals in the form of large user group who advocate themselves on policing websites that offends them based on specific issues. It is transnational in terms of operation and membership, members of the group tend to be self-appointed and possess neither the public mandate nor a statutory basis. However, they posses a potent force as it is up to Internet uses as much as anyone else to react quickly when offensive materials are transmitted

LAW AND LEGISLATION

Based on the powers provided for in the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Act (1998) and the Communications and Multimedia Act (1998). Social regulation includes content development and content regulation; the latter includes the prohibition of offensive content as well as public education on content-related issues . The Act provides a generic set of regulatory provisions based on generic definitions of market and service activities and services. The jurisdiction of this Act is restricted to networked services and activities only. • CMA 1998 allows MCMC to take preventive measures and advise license holders when a service user may be contravening national laws. • CMA 1998 as being subject to Ministerial Determination without consultation with any licensees or persons. • CMA 1998, Section 263 refers to the general duty of licensees where local laws of the country, such as sedition, should not be contravened. This might lead to the blockage of the network facilities or network service, application service or content application by the MCMC. • Part 4, Section 211 refers to the prohibition on provision of offensive content : whereby no content applications service provider, or other person using a content application service, shall provide content which is indecent, obscene, false, menacing, or offensive in character with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person. • Part 10, Section 233 refers to the improper use of network facilities or network service whereby a person who makes, creates or solicits; and initiates the transmission of obscene, indecent, false, menacing of offensive intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person. • Both section 211 and 233 states that contravening individuals shall be liable, upon conviction, to a fine not exceeding RM50 000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year or both, and shall also be liable to a further fine of RM1000 for every day or part of a day during which the offence is continued after conviction

HOWEVER: CMA ACT 588, Part I, Section 3.3: Nothing in this Act shall be construed as permitting the censorship of the Internet and point 7 of the 10-point Multimedia Bill of Guarantees states that there would be no censorship on the Internet, therefore this move of blocking Malaysia today was against the pledge.

MALAYSIA-TODAY

August 2004 – The newsblog was founded and has received almost 100 million hits since then.

August 26 th 2008 - MCMC ordered all domestic Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block online news portal Malaysia Today.

30 th August 2008 - EWC Minister Datuk Shaziman Abu Mansor and Home Minister Syed Hamid said the government did not instruct MCMC to block the website. Datuk Shaziman said that MCMC runs on its own and the Government only given a “general instruction” to the commission to allow all websites and blogs to function as long as they adhere to the CMA.

September 4 th 2008 – MCMC’s directive to ISPs to block access to Malaysia Today portal stands pending an investigation to determine if its editor, Raja Petra Kamaruddin, should be charged under Section 211 or 233 of the CMA. Mohamed Sharil Tarmizi, the MCMC chief operating officer, claimed that the commission received several complaints from the public (“ some of the comments on the website were insensitive, bordering on incitement ”) therefore the preventive measure was taken under Section 263 of the Act.

September 6 th 2008 – The Department of Islamic Development (JAKIM) along with several Muslim organizations have lodged a police report against Malaysia-Today website editor Raja Petra Kamarudin for allegedly insulting the Malays, Muslims and Islam in the articles produced ( I promise to be a good, non-hypocritical Muslim and Not all Arabs are descendants of the Prophet .) However, other sources report that the block was due to the inflammatory comments of an article titled “Malays, the enemy of Islam” .

September 10 th 2008 – MCMC ordered by the Cabinet to reinstate access to all blocked websites including Malaysia-Today and action will now be taken under laws such as the Sedition Act, the Penal Code, the CMA and even the ISA, should the situation in the country reach a dangerous and unacceptable level.

September 12 th 2008 – Raja Petra Kamaruddin charged under the ISA.

AROUND THE WORLD

• Following on the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Centre, the Information Awareness Office was created in 2002, aimed to develop technology that would enable it to collect and process massive amounts of information about every individual in the USA .

• In Singapore, Internet services provided by the three major ISPs are subject to regulation by the Media Development Authority , which blocks a number of websites containing “mass impact objectionable” material (pornography, racial and religious issues). In September 2005, 3 people were arrested and charged under the Sedition Act for posting racist comments on the Internet, with 2 sentenced to imprisonment.

• In Thailand, the authority body anchoring Internet censorship is the Ministry of Information and Communications Technology , collaborating with the Royal Thai Police (blocking approximately 32500 websites) and the Communications Authority of Thailand . Prior to September 2006, 34411 websites were blocked, with pornography and threats to national security (criticisms of the king, government and/or military) as being the main cause.

• In India, Cyber Crime Investigation Cell is in charge of dealing with cyber crimes and enforcing provisions of Information Technology Act 2000. Internet censorship mainly targets religious issues and is justified by the government as necessary to maintain communal harmony , peace and tranquillity, given the history of communal tensions in India.

• United Kingdom: The Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) operates with the police, government, the public, ISPs and the wider online industry. IWF is the UK hotline for the public and IT professionals to report illegal content specifically pertaining to child sexual abuse content hosted worldwide and criminally obscene and incitement to racial hatred content hosted in the UK. NETIZENS’ REACTION

• Tun Dr. Mahathir condemned the action as “a degree of oppressive arrogance worthy of a totalitarian state”, and that government would soon lose credibility and respect among the people.

• National Alliance of Bloggers said that the move went against the spirit of the promise the Government made and will prove to rattle investors’ confidence in the country.

• The Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) argues that the Government should acknowledge that the problem lies in the failure of mainstream media in fulfilling its duties of reporting truthful and fair information .

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS

• Participation of netizens in civil society should be recognized not as a threat, but as a body for check and balances in functioning society .

• The guarantees under CMA , which states that there should be no monopoly or oligopoly control of airwaves and nothing in the Act can be regarded as censorship of the Internet, must be enforced .

• Ensure that the MCMC upholds its stance on promoting access to communications and multimedia services.

• Cease using blocking as a solution (permanent or deterrent) to violation of CMA Acts.

• The Sedition Act should be amended to allow for greater freedom of expression and reasonable, constructive critique of national policy and political climate.

PARTY POSITIONS

BARISAN NASIONAL PAKATAN RAKYAT

• Home Minister argues that the block was justified as it was a • PKR states that the decision is tantamount to internet much needed preventive measure to eliminate public censorship and views it as one of the many onslaught on fear . He also states that bloggers should act responsibly and the civil liberties that are the right of all Malaysians. PKR understand the sensitivities and not offend people or also argues that the move of censoring Malaysia-Today as threaten the country’s security as it would damage public an attempt to curb the access of conscientious confidence and investors’ confidence. Malaysians to the Internet . ( full press statement here )

• Khairy Jamaluddin ( Rembau MP ) disagrees with the move of • (Jelutong MP) argues that Malaysians are mature censoring websites, citing it to be a blatant and crude enough to discern between what is good and what is bad employment of state power that is inconsistent with the online. widening of democratic space ...