CMA changes may bring more harm to children, groups warn
Twelve advocacy groups have urged the government to postpone the debate or withdraw the recently tabled amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA).
The NGOs argued the amendments could potentially affect children more instead of giving them protection.
“We are unable to support the CMA amendments...
Twelve advocacy groups have urged the government to postpone the debate or withdraw the recently tabled amendments to the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (CMA).
The NGOs argued the amendments could potentially affect children more instead of giving them protection.
“We are unable to support the CMA amendments tabled by the government.
“We urge MPs to push for a postponement of the debate on the bill, or a withdrawal so that thorough consultation can be conducted and improvements can be made to the bill,” they said in a joint statement.
The amendment to the act, tabled for first reading on Monday, covers a range of issues such as hate speech, scams and unsolicited messages.
It also includes new provisions that would allow law enforcement agencies to compel data keepers to preserve and disclose communications data.
The amendments, as well as new explanations spelt out therein, appear to refine the section and make it more targeted.
For example, Section 233(1)(a) is amended so that objectionable communications are “grossly offensive” and not just “offensive”.
Children also liable
Elaborating, the groups said the proposed amendments do not exempt children from liability for offences under the CMA.
While they understand the increased penalty in Section 233 of the CMA is to improve protections for children, the provision could be cut both ways as minors can be considered liable to criminalisation under the same section.
“The lack of provisions exempting children from liability for offences under this law is troubling as it fails to consider a child’s mental developmental process and comprehension, and the potential harm that criminalising children may cause,” they noted.
Criminalising children, they added, ignores their capacity for change and rehabilitation, often leading to long-term negative impacts, including perpetuating cycles of criminal behaviour and social marginalisation.
They also noted that the amendments did not sufficiently tackle the growing problem of child sexual abuse material (CSAM).
“The industry’s obligations concerning CSAM are the same as for any other obscene material, and there is no clear requirement for industry players to actively filter, block, or report CSAM,” they stated.
Overlapping laws
Another concern also involves the proposed changes to Section 233, which they said overlaps with the Sexual Offences Against Children Act 2017 (Soaca), and could lead to offenders facing lighter penalties.
“For instance, the penalty for making, producing, or directing the making or production of child sexual abuse material under the Soaca includes imprisonment for a maximum of 30 years.
“However, whereas the proposed amendments to Section 233 of the CMA, it is a maximum of five years.
“Coupled with our earlier concerns on the lack of clarity surrounding harmful content (CSAM), and hence a lower bar for investigation, we fear that the authorities would choose the easier path of prosecuting such crimes under the CMA instead of the Soaca.”
Instead of expanding CMA’s reach with vague, broad and punitive measures, they urged the government to prioritise children’s safety, uphold privacy rights, and provide clear and enforceable guidelines for content regulation.
“And we stand ready to engage in further dialogue to ensure any legislation passed is effective, balanced, and protects the rights and wellbeing of all children in Malaysia,” they said.
