Beware! Gov't can tap calls under five laws
Nigel AwPublished: Jun 16, 2014 7:51 AM | Updated: Jun 16, 2014 9:54 AM
PARLIAMENT Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nancy Shukri revealed today that the government has extensive powers to tap the phone calls of Malaysian citizens.
PARLIAMENT Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nancy Shukri revealed today that the government has extensive powers to tap the phone calls of Malaysian citizens.
Nancy said this in a written reply to Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong (left), who asked the frequency in which the deputy public prosecutor has granted permission to intercept email, telecommunications and posts of politicians, criminals as well as members of the public between 1998 and 2014.
So how often has the government been listening in to the calls of politicians?
“From 2009 onwards, there was no interception of communications involving any politician,” reads the reply.
The vague answer has left Liew wondering what the authorities had been up to with the communications of politicians prior to 2009.
“Does this mean that before 2009, there was a lot of phone tapping? What happened between 1998 and 2009?
“The government needs to be more transparent,” he told Malaysiakini when contacted.
According to the reply, Nancy (right) said the authorities are empowered to intercept any message or conversation, be it through post or telecommunications devices.
She listed a total of five laws that allow such action, including Section 116C of the Penal Code.
The other laws include Section 27A of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Section 11 of the Kidnapping Act 1961, Section 43 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Act 2009 and Section 6 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012.
Nancy said an application to intercept communications can be made by the police or other enforcement agencies during investigation or intelligence gathering.
“The application does not normally refer to any subject but more to certain communications that need to be intercepted to obtain information and statements for the purpose of intelligence gathering and criminal investigation,” her reply states.
‘Covert tapping concerns’
Liew said this was on top of possible covert operations by the police and military intelligence.
“This is just from the Attorney-General’s Chambers, there is no guarantee that the police and military intelligence are not doing their own tapping without official approval,” he said.
Liew said he had raised the question as there is common belief among politicians that since the Reformasi movement in 1998, their phones were being tapped.
He added that there was no necessity for so many laws that allow interception of private communications.
“This is often political and unfortunately, it is expanding,” he said.
The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 is the latest law that allows for private communications to be intercepted.
Nancy said this in a written reply to Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong (left), who asked the frequency in which the deputy public prosecutor has granted permission to intercept email, telecommunications and posts of politicians, criminals as well as members of the public between 1998 and 2014.So how often has the government been listening in to the calls of politicians?
“From 2009 onwards, there was no interception of communications involving any politician,” reads the reply.
The vague answer has left Liew wondering what the authorities had been up to with the communications of politicians prior to 2009.
“Does this mean that before 2009, there was a lot of phone tapping? What happened between 1998 and 2009?
“The government needs to be more transparent,” he told Malaysiakini when contacted.
According to the reply, Nancy (right) said the authorities are empowered to intercept any message or conversation, be it through post or telecommunications devices.She listed a total of five laws that allow such action, including Section 116C of the Penal Code.
The other laws include Section 27A of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Section 11 of the Kidnapping Act 1961, Section 43 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Act 2009 and Section 6 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012.
Nancy said an application to intercept communications can be made by the police or other enforcement agencies during investigation or intelligence gathering.
“The application does not normally refer to any subject but more to certain communications that need to be intercepted to obtain information and statements for the purpose of intelligence gathering and criminal investigation,” her reply states.
‘Covert tapping concerns’
Liew said this was on top of possible covert operations by the police and military intelligence.
“This is just from the Attorney-General’s Chambers, there is no guarantee that the police and military intelligence are not doing their own tapping without official approval,” he said.
Liew said he had raised the question as there is common belief among politicians that since the Reformasi movement in 1998, their phones were being tapped.
He added that there was no necessity for so many laws that allow interception of private communications.
“This is often political and unfortunately, it is expanding,” he said.
The Security Offences (Special Measures) Act 2012 is the latest law that allows for private communications to be intercepted.
View Comments0