Court Of Appeal Strikes Words ‘’Annoy’’ & “Offensive’’ From Communications and Multimedia Act 1998
The Court of Appeal ruled that both terms in Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act are unconstitutional.
Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter, or Telegram and WhatsApp channels for the latest stories and updates.
In 2022, activist Heidy Quah was given a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) on improper use of network facilities by initiating the transmission of offensive communications on refugees in the country through Facebook, with an intention to ‘’annoy’’ others on 5 June 2020.
The charge was framed under Section 233 (1) (a) of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, which carries a maximum fine of RM50,000 or imprisonment for up to a year or both and a further fine of RM1,000 for each day the offence is continued after conviction.
Quah was allowed bail of RM2,000 with one surety.
The charges against her were dropped because Judge MM Edwin Paramjothy ruled that the charges were defective and did not comply with the requirements of Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998 and Sections 152 to 154 of the Criminal Procedures Code (CPC).
She has since filed a civil suit to challenge the validity of the terms ‘’offensive’’ and ‘’annoy’’ in Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act.
Today, the Court of Appeal struck out both words from the Act, ruling them unconstitutional since they go against the Federal Constitution’s Article 10(2)(a).
In light of the good news, Quah said she’s grateful for the court because Malaysians can exercise their democratic rights.
Quah believes Malaysians have the right to champion causes that are important to them without fearing being ‘’labelled’’ as causing offense or annoyance. She explained that removing both terms from the charge protects the freedom of speech afforded to all.
In Malaysia, we want to uphold the truth and sometimes there needs to be difficult conversations to be held.
Activist Heidy Quah tells BFM
She explained that removing both terms from the Act allows offenders to be charged for actual crimes instead of using vague and subjective reasons. This helps promote transparency and accountability.
Did you know that more than 2,800 cases have been investigated under this now deemed unconstitutional law?
— Aidila Razak (@aidilarazak) August 19, 2025
And up to March 2023, fines amounting to RM138,250 were imposed on those found to be guilty of breaking it.
Source: Communications and Digital Ministry via Dewan Rakyat https://t.co/n6xxji8wYS
Share your thoughts with us via TRP’s Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Threads.
