Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s slew of reforms announced tonight has caught many observers and his critics off-guard.

The reforms range from the often maligned Internal Security Act (ISA), three Emergency declarations and a promise to review newspaper licensing and freedom of assembly laws.

Immediate reactions from human rights activists and media practitioners follows:

Abolition of ISA

Ambiga Sreenevasan, Bersih 2.0 chairperson and former Bar Council president

I was really happy (when the announcement was made). When I was with the Bar (Council), we had been asking for this for so many years. We should take this on board on good faith. I do hope they don't drag their feet. The last time they announced the amendments it took a while. To abolish will not take long. They (government) must see the changes through.

It's a pretty bold move. I always believe that when they (government) do something right, we must support it. But bringing in an Anti-Terrorism Act... we are fine with that but we need to look at how far (its powers will go). What I agree with is there is now more judicial oversight in relation to prolonged detention.

Syed Ibrahim Syed Noh, Gerakan Mansuh ISA (GMI) president

Is it true that the ISA will be abolished, and how long until then? Secondly, we are against the ISA due to detention without trial... but if the two new laws provide for detention without trial, we consider our struggle far from over.

We are a bit relieved that it (ISA) will be abolished, but with two new laws coming in... that’s why we don’t want to be too happy just yet.

Norlaila Othman, GMI committee member and wife of a former ISA detainee

We don’t know whether to praise God or cheer, because we have been lied to many times before. As long as the Kamunting (ISA detention) camp is not closed, until all the detainees are released and the ISA is no longer in force, then we will believe them.

Just like during Bersih 2.0 when Najib promised a stadium, but look what happened in the end? Even if the ISA is abolished, they can create two new laws at any time. We don’t want it to merely be a name change.

Newspaper annual permit

V Anbalagan, National Union of Journalists (NUJ) general secretary

For a start, the government has finally taken a giant step, but the NUJ would prefer if the government went all the way, just like in Indonesia. The last time during (former Indonesian president) Suharto’s rule, they had similar laws as we do, but now there are none. Papers there work on credibility, and the people buy their news. Otherwise, you (the paper) will die.

They (government) want to give licences that don’t need to be renewed, but the issue is that the moment you flaunt the law, they can revoke (the licence) and there is no way to challenge the Home Minister’s decision.

The ideal situation is to do away with licensing. If you have the money, you can start a newspaper, on the premise that you follow the laws or face the music.

Ahmad Lutfi Othman, Harakah chief editor and senior political writer

The real issue is, how difficult or easy it is to get a publishing and printing permit. On principle, the concept of imposing a permit on the media is in itself a major obstacle to media freedom. The media should not need permits. It is enough to register newspapers, magazines or news portals as we would a company or a vehicle.

The prime minister did not touch on various other laws that limit the freedom of media practitioners such as the Sedition Act and Official Secrets Act, so his announcements only skim the surface, with many fundamental issues not amended.

Ambiga Sreenevesan, Bersih 2.0 chairperson and former Bar Council president

I really wish they had gone the whole distance and say the media don't need a licence. It would have been nice if they had gone all the way as they ought to have done.

Annual renewal is a nuisance, but to say that the permit can be revoked at any time still leaves the power over the media in the government's hands.