The Malaysian government has intensified its policing of public expression through the “3R” issues of race, religion, and royalty. Former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin was recently accused of sedition for having posted a by-election campaign video in which he reminded an audience that he had enough support to form a government in the aftermath of the last general election in November 2022. At the time, Muhyiddin’s claim of majority support was bolstered by the statutory declarations of 115 members of parliament that were presented to Malaysia’s king. In the video, Muhyiddin recalled these events and questioned the decision of the king to instead appoint Anwar Ibrahim, now prime minister, to form government. Members of the ruling coalition have alleged that Muhyiddin’s speech, posted in a Tik Tok video, is seditious and may raise unnecessary tensions and hatred within Malaysian society.
Last year, Muhyiddin was charged and acquitted for corruption for his management of the Covid-19 crisis. This most recent controversy has now led to an investigation against him for sedition, one that has now resulted in formal charges. The opposition and several media organizations have questioned Anwar’s interference in the investigation, as well as the role of the judiciary in cases focusing on the prime minister’s former enemies. For decades, the Sedition Act (1948) and corruption laws have been extensively used to silence political opponents and activists—including at one point Anwar Ibrahim himself. In fact, several other members of former governments and their families are under scrutiny by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) for corruption and abuse of power, including former minister of finance Daim Zainuddin, and former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad.
More generally, the government’s control of public space and expression is framed by the 3R rule that allows investigations under the Sedition Act to be conducted against individuals whose declarations are deemed offensive in relation to race, religion, or royalty. Last year, the government proposed to pass a more specific law to preserve “peace and security,” a proposed change that was severely criticized by former representatives of the Malaysian Bar. Malaysia saw several politically orchestrated ethnic riots in the past that are now mostly depicted as “racial riots.” Memories of the violence of May 1969 have often been used as a political tool to justify the shrinking of civil liberties and freedom of expression. More recently, the government announced a law licensing online media, creating international public outcry. Malaysia’s agenda to become an AI and tech hub has received significant investment from the big players, and a tightening of social media and media laws could jeopardize the government's efforts to boost the country’s digital economy ambitions.
Sophie Lemière is an adjunct fellow (non-resident) with the Southeast Asia Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.
