LAW 2523

2 2023/2024
ASSIGNMENT
CLO 1

KOLEJ PROFESIONAL MARA

SERI ISKANDAR

COURSE : BUSINESS LAW (2.0)

COURSE CODE : LAW 2523
TYPE OF ASSESSMENT : ASSIGNMENT
ACADEMIC SESSION : 1 2022/2023
COURSE LEARNING OUTCOME : CLO 1
Identify the concept of law in Malaysia with regards to its
definition, classification, sources, and hierarchy of court in
Malaysia in the related activities. (A1, PLO8)
WEEK / DATE OUT : WEEK 4 / 29 AUGUST 2023
WEEK / DATE IN : WEEK 7 / 27 SEPTEMBER 2022
GROUP : DBIT 4/ DMK 6

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS:

• Carefully check the submission date and the instructions given with the assignment/ project.
Late submission will not be accepted.
• If you use other people’s work or ideas in your assignment/project, kindly reference them
using APA system.

NOTE: If you are caught cheating or plagiarising, the case shall be referred to the college
Disciplinary Board. For all proven cases of cheating or plagiarising, a faculty member has the
authority to grant a failing ‘F’ grade for the work undertaken, or for the course(s).

Thisinstructionsbookletconsitof6printedpages.

1
TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1. Introduction to Freedom of Speech

1.1 Theoretical meaning of Freedom of Speech
1.2 Constitutional meaning of Freedom of Speech
2. Acts Restrict the Freedom of Speech
2.1 Defamation Act 1957
2.2 Sedition Act 1948
2.3 Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984
2.4 Internal Security Act 1960
2.5 Police Act 1967
3. Cases of Freedom of Speech in Malaysia
4. Conclusion
5. References

2
1. Introduction to Freedom of Speech
Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right that protects an individual's ability to express
their thoughts, ideas, opinions, and beliefs without censorship, restraint, or government
interference. It is a cornerstone of many democratic societies and is typically enshrined in their
constitutions or legal frameworks as a fundamental principle.

1.1 Theoretical meaning of Freedom of Speech

Freedom of speech and expression is considered a fundamental right. It can be said that
human freedom of speech is one of the most cherished freedoms of man. According to Masum,
“Freedom of speech is more important than democracy for democracy, it does not necessarily
guarantee freedom of speech which is the first step towards building or starting a great
democracy and Freedom of Speech And Expression In Malaysia: Protection Under The Federal
Constitution 50 equality always ensuring that people’s voices are properly heard is available and
yet subject to limitations” (Masum, 2009). Furthermore, “Freedom of speech and expression must
be recognized as a fundamental and fundamental right, upon which all other rights depend. We
must also note that in order to maintain public order, its freedom must be limited somewhat”
(Venugopal & Hassan, 2012).

1.2 Constitutional meaning of Freedom of Speech

In the Malaysian context, the Federal Constitution refers to free speech as “freedom of
speech and expression” stated in Article 10 which guarantees categorically in Clause 1(a) that
“every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression”. Freedom of expression for
Malaysian citizens only is not absolute, as freedom is subject to certain restrictions under the
same Article in paragraphs (2), (3) and (4). The Federal Constitution declares in Article 4(1) that
“this constitution is the supreme law of the Federation and any law passed after Merdeka
(Independence) Day which is inconsistent with this Constitution shall, to the extent of the
inconsistency, be void.” The second part of the Federal Constitution deals with fundamental
freedoms. Section 2 of the Malaysian Human Rights Commission Act 1999 clearly states that the
term “human rights” refers to the fundamental freedoms set out in Part II of the Federal
Constitution. Therefore, both regulations recognize the importance of rights explicitly defined in
this part of the Federal Constitution, including the “right to freedom of speech and expression”.
Article 10(1)(a) of the Constitution grants each citizen the right to ‘speech and expression’. The
use of the word ‘expression’ extends the scope of rights, covering word of mouth, signs, symbols,
gestures, art, music, sculpture, photographs, films, videotapes, cartoons, computer art,

3
architecture, print media and web presentation. Freedom of speech does not mean free from
consequences. If one thing can be determined immediately, it is that freedom of speech is indeed
a constitutional right under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution, but it has certain limitations.
Article 10 of the Federal Constitution contains Freedom of Speech, Assembly and Association. In
addition to the exceptions in Article 10, it can be said that this freedom does not extend beyond
the scope of legal, moral and social influence. Moreover, the guarantee of the core freedom of
Malaysians in the Federal Constitution cannot be accidentally deleted as stated in Article 10. It
allows individuals to openly express an opinion on any issue without worrying about the outcome.
The basic freedoms granted by the Federal Constitution are balanced in order to control and
protect the multi-ethnic society. (561)

2. Acts Restrict the Freedom of Speech

The history of freedom of speech in Malaysia is a complex one, dating back to the
country's colonial era. However, there are a number of statutory acts which regulate the
immunity provided by Article 10, such as the Defamation Act 1957, the Sedition Act 1948, the
Printing and Publishing Act 1984, the Internal Security Act and the Police Act 1967.

2.1 Defamation Act 1957

The Defamation Act does not define the word "defamation". Instead, the definition of
"defamation" is to be found in Malaysian case law and the English common law. By virtue of
section 3 of the Civil Law Act 1956, the common law of England as at 7 April 1956 in relation to
defamation is applicable in Malaysia. At common law, there are two types of defamation which is
Libel; defamation in permanent form, and Slander; defamation in temporary form. For both Libel
and Slander a defamatory statement is required. A defamatory statement is a statement that :

I. Tends to lower a person in the estimation of right thinking members of society generally;
II. Causes a person to be shunned or avoided or to expose him to hatred, contempt or
ridicule; or
III. Conveys an imputation on a person disparaging or injurious to his office, profession,
calling, trade or business.

4
There are two methods of interpreting the words in an allegedly defamatory statement :

• By their natural and ordinary meaning; or

- The literal meaning of the words;
- An implied or inferred or an indirect meaning
- Any meaning based on general knowledge

• By innuendo
- used to describe words which have special meaning only to persons who have
knowledge of some special background or facts

In an action for libel, the following elements need to be satisfied:

• There is a defamatory statement made or conveyed by written or printed words or in

some other permanent form;
• The defamatory statement concerns the plaintiff; and
• The defamatory statement is published to a person other than the plaintiff

For an action in slander, the following elements need to be satisfied:

• There is a defamatory statement made or conveyed by spoken words, sounds or in some

other non-permanent form;
• The defamatory statement concerns the plaintiff;
• The defamatory statement is published to a person other than the plaintiff

In civil cases, the person so defamed will normally sue the maker of the defamatory words
for compensation. The amount of the compensation depends on the damage caused to the
reputation of the person suing. While in criminal cases, the punishment for defamation is a jail
sentence for a maximum of two years, or a fine, or a combination of a jail sentence and a fine
(Section 500-502 Penal Code). (455)

2.2 Sedition Act 1948

The Sedition Act 1948 in Malaysia is a law prohibiting discourse deemed as seditious. The
act was originally enacted by the colonial authorities of British Malaya in 1948 to contain the
local communist insurgence. The act criminalises speech with "seditious tendency".

Section 3(1) Sedition Act 1948

5
 3.(1) A “seditious tendency” is a tendency –

(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against any Ruler or
against any Government.
(b) to excite the subjects of any Ruler or the inhabitants of any territory governed
by any Government to attempt to procure in the territory of the Ruler or
governed by the Government, the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means,
of any matter as by law established;
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the
administration of justice in Malaysia or in any State;
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan
Agong or of the Ruler of any State or amongst the inhabitants of Malaysia or of
any State;
(e) to promote feelings of ill will and hostility between different races or classes of
the population of Malaysia; or
(f) to question any matter, right, status, position, privilege, sovereignty or
prerogative established or protected by the provisions of Part III of the Federal
Constitution or Article 152, 153 or 181 of the Federal Constitution.

The Sedition Act 1948 makes it an offence to engage in acts with a "seditious tendency",
including but not limited to the spoken word and publications; conviction may result in a
sentence of a fine up to RM5,000, three years in jail, or both. (274)

2.3 Printing Presses and Publications Acts 1984

The Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA) is a Malaysian law that regulates the
use of printing presses and the printing, importation, production, reproduction, publishing,
and distribution of publications.

The purpose of this act is to control all types of publications, whether printed in the country or
imported from abroad. Section 3 of the act states that any person who intends to carry out
printing work must obtain a license from the Home Minister. Any person who uses a printing
press without a valid license contravenes this act and if found guilty shall be imprisoned for a
term not exceeding three years or fined not exceeding RM20,000 or both.
6
Under Section 4, any person found guilty of printing or producing material which is obscene or
against public decency shall be imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years or fined not
exceeding RM20,000 or both. Any person who possesses any prohibited publication without
reasonable excuse shall, on conviction, be fined not exceeding RM5,000.

Under Section 5, a permit must be obtained first before a person may print, import, publish,
sell and distribute any newspaper. Those found guilty of committing these offences shall be
imprisoned for a term not exceeding three years or fined not exceeding RM20,000 or both.
This act also provides provisions to the minister to control undesirable publications. To
facilitate control, this act requires that the names of the printer and publisher be printed in
the publication, either in Malay or English. (241)

2.4 Internal Security Act 1960

The Internal Security Act 1960 (ISA) was a preventive detention law in force in Malaysia.
It allowed the government to detain people without trial or criminal charges for up to two
years, renewable indefinitely. The stated purpose of the ISA was to deter communist activity
in Malaysia during the Malayan Emergency and afterwards. However, the law has also been
used to detain political opponents, activists, and other individuals who have been perceived as
a threat to the government. The law has also been used to detain people for long periods of
time without charge, and some detainees have been subjected to torture and ill-treatment.

Human rights abuses under the ISA Under the ISA individuals are deprived of many of
their fundamental human rights enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. They
are deprived of their right to a fair and public trial, the right to be presumed innocent until
proven guilty according to law, and their right not to be subjected to torture or other cruel,
inhuman or degrading treatment. Individuals detained under the ISA have been regularly
denied access to lawyers and their families. (192)

7
 2.5 Police Act 1967

An Act relating to the organization, discipline, powers and duties of the Royal Malaysia
Police and matters incidental thereto (Police Act 1967). The Police Act 1967 (Act 344) is
an act of the Parliament of Malaysia that provides for the organization, administration, and
control of the police force in Malaysia. The act was first passed in 1967 and has been
amended several times since then.

Key provisions of the Police Act:

• Powers and duties: The Police Act gives the police the power to arrest,
investigate crimes, and maintain public order. They also have the power to search
people and places, and to seize property.
• Structure and organization: The Police Act establishes the police force as a
hierarchical organization, with the Inspector-General of Police at the top. The
police force is divided into different departments, such as the criminal investigation
department, the traffic police department, and the public order department.
• Accountability: The Police Act is designed to ensure that the police are
accountable to the public. This is achieved through a number of mechanisms, such
as the Police Commission, which oversees the appointment and promotion of
senior police officers, and the Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission,
which investigates complaints against police officers. (205)

3. Cases of Freedom of Speech in Malaysia

1. Case study : Mat Shuhaimi Bin Shafiei v. Malaysia November 25, 2016

Facts of case study

Mat Shuhaimi Bin Shafiei a Malaysian politician and Member of the State of Selangor’s General
Assembly was charged with publishing allegedly seditious material for a December 2010 blog post
containing the caption My opinion is based on the Constitution of the State of Selangor, 1959.
Shuhaimi filed a Notice of Motion with the trial court seeking to have the charge stricken from his
record on the grounds that Section 4 of Malaysia’s Sedition Act. Depended on the dismissal of any
mens rea element typically required to prove criminality, and that this dismissal unconstitutionally
restricted his Freedom of Speech and Expression as enshrined in Malaysia’s Federal Constitution,
Article 10(1)(a). (108)

8
Acts of case study

Section 4 of the Sedition Act criminalizes the publication of messages with a seditious
tendency, while Section 3(3) states that the intention of the person charged is irrelevant
if the act had a seditious tendency. Shuhaimi argued that Section 3(3) should be subject
to the proportionality test, which requires the government to objectively fair and
proportionate restrictions on speech. He also argued that Article 3(3) should be subject to
the balancing test in Public Prosecutor v. Azmi Shahrom. Shuhaimi also argued that for a
charge to stand under Article 4 of the Sedition Act, the mens rea element should be
restored, as without it, it would disproportionately restrict his article 10 right to Freedom
of Speech and Expression. (118)

Held
Judge George Varghese, a three-judge panel, ruled that the appellant, Mat Shuhaimi Bin
Shafiei, was precluded by the doctrine of res judicata, the proportionality test could be
properly applied in light of the objectives set out in Article 10(2) of the Federal
Constitution, and if the proportionality test applies, whether Article 3(3) of the Sedition
Act can withstand it. He found that the lower court judge had misapplied precedent in
reaching its decision, and that the question of whether Article 3(3) of the Sedition Act
was proportionate in light of the objective set out under Article 10(2) of the Federal
Constitution was a "novel" question.

Varghese also found that Article 3(3) of the Sedition Act placed a disproportionate
restriction on speech in light of the government's aims in this regard. The language of
Article 3(3) ("shall be deemed irrelevant") placed an absolute dismissal on the mens rea
element in the crime of sedition, rather than providing a "rebuttable presumption" or
some lesser standard. The Court ruled that Section 3(3) of the Sedition Act was
unconstitutional, calling it "invalid and of no effect in law." (184)

9
Implication of case
Mat Shuhaimi Bin Shafiei was charged about “My opinion is based on the Constitution of
the State of Selangor, 1959”. Section 4 of the Sedition Act criminalizes the publication of
messages carrying “a seditious tendency.” Section 3(3) of the Sedition Act states that,
“[f]or the purpose of proving the commission of any offence against this Act the intention
of the person charged shall be deemed to be irrelevant if in fact the act had a seditious
tendency.

Mat Shuhaimi Bin Shafiei gets:

(Columbia Global Freedom of Expression, 2023)

Lastly, Shuhaimi will still face criminal charges under Article 4 of the Sedition Act, but the
prosecution will now be required to demonstrate seditious intent. (974)

10
4. Conclusion

Freedom of speech is a fundamental human right that is enshrined in the Federal

Constitution of Malaysia. It is one of the most important pillars of a democratic society, as
it allows citizens to express their views and opinions freely, without fear of reprisal.
However, freedom of speech is not absolute, and there are some limitations that can be
imposed on it in order to protect other important rights and values. It is important to
note that the limitations on freedom of speech in Malaysia are not unique. Many other
countries have laws that restrict freedom of speech in certain areas. However, the scope
of these limitations varies from country to country. It is also important to note that the
Malaysian government has a responsibility to ensure that its laws are applied fairly and
proportionately, and that they do not unduly restrict freedom of speech. (147)

11
 References

Columbia Global Freedom of Expression. (2023, September 5). Mat Shuhaimi bin

Shafiei v. Malaysia - Global Freedom of Expression. Global Freedom of Expression.

https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/mat-shuhaimi-bin-shafiei-v-

malaysia/

Defamation law in Malaysia. (n.d.).

http://www.laweddie.com/wordpress/defamation-law-in-malaysia/

LAWS OF MALAYSIA ONLINE VERSION OF UPDATED TEXT OF REPRINT Act 574

PENAL CODE. (2018).

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/natlex/docs/ELECTRONIC/61339/117909/F1085941047/MYS613

39%202015.pdf

MALAYSIA The Internal Security Act (ISA). (2003).

https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/3f1438bc4.pdf

Mah, R. (2020, July 17). The Basics Of Defamation Law In Malaysia. Libel &

Defamation - Malaysia. https://www.mondaq.com/libel--defamation/966524/the-basics-

of-defamation-law-in-malaysia-

Police Act 1967 (Act 344) (As At 25th February 2016). (n.d.). Law Books Malaysia |

Joshua Legal Art Gallery. https://www.joshualegalartgallery.com/products/police-act-

1967-act-344
12
 UUM Press | Universiti Utara Malaysia - UUM Press | Universiti Utara Malaysia.

(n.d.). http://uumpress.uum.edu.my/component/content/article/164-

announcement/act/578-printing-presses-and-publications-act-

1984?Itemid=437#:~:text=The%20purpose%20of%20this%20act,1%2C000%20copies

%20in%20an%20hour

(2021). Astroawani.com. https://www.astroawani.com/berita-malaysia/what-

sedition-act-1948-43073

13
 Appendix 1
VERY WEAK WEAK FAIR GOOD VERY GOOD Marks
obtained

Weightage
Attribute Subattribute
2 4 6 8 10

Effective Leadership No clear evidence of the Able to lead self and/or Able to lead self and/or Able to lead effectively High ability to lead
(Observation on leadership quality ability to lead self and/or others towards goal others towards goal self and/or others effectively self and/or
among the group members in others achievement but with achievement with some towards goal others towards goal 2 / 4%
researching the topic and completing limited effect and require effect and require minor achievement achievement.
the presentation) further improvements improvements
Work was not divided Work was divided Work was divided Work was divided well Work was divided
Delegation of work equally. Only few minimally amongst group satisfactorily amongst amongst group excellently amongst
(Observation on the participation of members are doing the members. group members. members. group members.
Laeadership, Autonomy and Responsibility

group members in researching the work while others are 3 / 6%

topic and completing the ignored.
presentation)

Responsibility
(Observation on the commitment of
group members to work in a group in
consulting and clarifying the outcome
of research and the commitment to
complete the presentation as a
group)
Lack of initiative and is
not interested to be
engaged in the teamwork
Take the initiative to be
engaged in the teamwork
when requested
Satisfactorily responsible
and taking initiative to be
engaged in the teamwork
Responsible and Very responsible and
always take the always take the initiative
initiative to be engaged to be engaged in the
in the teamwork teamwork
3 / 6%

No attempt to make Tries to make decision by Satisfactory attempts to Able to make a good Able to make a very good
Decision making
decision. Do not understanding the make decisions and decision based on good decision based on
(Observation on the ability to plan the
understand the situation situation. Decision made satisfactory understanding of the excellent understanding
presentation, (e.g.: choice of
and relate with options is based on limited understanding of the situation and available of the situation and 2 / 4%
presenters etc) and the ability to
that are available understanding of the situation and available options. available options.
choose the right content for the
situation and available options.
presentation)
options.
TOTAL
10 _/ 20%

3
 Appendix 2

KOLEJ PROFESIONAL MARA

GROUP ASSIGNMENT (20%)

SESSION 2 2023/2024

: 1) NUR HUSNA BINTI AHMAD : SIT2207-0186

LUTFI
: 2) NURUL HUMAIRAH BALQIS : SIT2207-0217
STUDENT’S NAME BINTI ROZLAN ID NO.
: 3)NURUL YASMIN BINTI HALID : SIT2207-0188
: 4)ALYA BATRISYIA BINTI RUSLI : SIT2207-0180
5)MUHAMMAD FIRDAUS BIN : Sit2207-0023
SHAHRIN
CLASS : DBIT 4B
LECTURER’S : SYED SALLEHUDDIN IDID BIN SYED SALIM IDID
NAME
COURSE NAME : BUSINESS LAW
COURSE CODE : LAW2523
COURSE : CLO 1: Identify the concept of law in Malaysia with regards to its
LEARNING definition, classification, sources, and hierarchy of court in Malaysia in the
OUTCOME (CLO) related activities. (A1, PLO8)
DATE OUT 29 AUGUST 2023
DATE IN 27 SEPTEMBER 2023

TOTAL SCORE: /20

TOTAL MARK: /20%

We hereby confirmed that this assignment/project is our own work and not copied or plagiarized
from any source. We have referenced the sources from which information is obtained by us for this
assignment/project.

Group leader’s Signature: Date: 29/9/2023

Group Leader’s Full Name: NUR HUSNA BINTI AHMAD LUTFI