#speechlaw

[aflawlessbunch]

When Free Speech Isn’t Free: The Price of Satire in Malaysia

If you’ve been online in Malaysia, you probably know the name Fahmi Reza. He is an artist who uses satire to shine a light on politics and power. His work has gone viral many times. From Najib’s clown face to caricatures of other leaders, Fahmi has become one of the loudest creative voices in the country. But every time he posts, the authorities are quick to act. He has been arrested, fined, investigated, and dragged to court. All for art that makes powerful people uncomfortable.

Back in 2016 he uploaded a clown caricature of Najib Razak.

For that, he was charged under the Communications and Multimedia Act and sentenced to a month in jail plus a fine of around RM30,000. The image did not threaten anyone. It was simply satire. Yet it was treated like a crime. Should a cartoon really cost someone their freedom?

More recently in 2024, he drew Musa Aman with the words “number one corruptor.”

That led to investigations under multiple laws including the Sedition Act. He was summoned to Bukit Aman and even the Native Court Keningau demanded customary compensation from him. Again, we are talking about a drawing. Not hate speech. Not inciting violence. Just a piece of art that those in power did not like. If this is enough to trigger such serious action, then what does that say about the strength of our free speech laws?

This makes us wonder how fragile free speech really is in Malaysia. If satire is treated as criminal, what does that mean for ordinary citizens who voice their opinions online? Who actually decides what crosses the line? And if the standard is based on whether government feels offended, then is that really a fair standard at all?

Speech law is supposed to protect both expression and the public interest. But when art and satire are punished, it raises the question of whether laws are being used to maintain order or simply to silence criticism.

At the end of the day, Fahmi’s case is not just about one artist. It reflects a bigger issue. How much freedom do Malaysians truly have to question power?

And until that question is answered honestly, the fear of crossing invisible lines will continue to hang over anyone who dares to speak.

Sources:

Malaysiakini (2018). “Artist gets a month’s jail, RM30K fine for Najib clown drawing.”

The Star (2024). “Sabah police detain activist Fahmi Reza under Sedition Act”

The Malaysian Reserve (2024). “Artist summoned by police over satirical graphic”

Erwiena Nurhani 1211105142

[commonsense-101]

How does verbal contracts work?

Contracts are something we all recognize, typically showing up as a document we read through, sign, and then forget all about it. But what happens when there’s no paper trail? What if it’s all just spoken? That’s where verbal contracts come into play. Are they trustworthy? Are they even valid? And how do they actually function? As a university student, I’ve witnessed some verbal contracts being used—especially when it comes to renting a house together with friends or classmates. Most of us skip the formalities and just agree verbally on who’s responsible for what, like chores, rent or utility bills. It might seem casual, but those spoken commitments still hold weight but everyone processes information a little differently. Take this incident as a case in point. My friend once told me about her roommate who had this annoying habit of leaving the air conditioning running all day long. When the electric bill arrived, they decided to stick to their original agreement: everyone would split the cost, but the roommate who used the most would pay a bit more. Seems fair, right? But then that roommate started arguing that my friend was charging her more than she should, even though it was pretty clear she was the main reason the bill was so high. Since there was no solid proof—like a separate meter for each room—it quickly turned into a classic he-said-she-said situation. From the roommate’s pov, my friend’s request probably felt more like an accusation. In the end, my friend didn’t want to escalate things, so she just let it slide. But honestly, it definitely made the atmosphere in the house a lot more uncomfortable. That’s the tricky thing about verbal agreements: when everything’s smooth sailing, they work just fine. But the moment there’s a disagreement, it becomes really tough to figure out who’s actually right.

Honestly, most of us have said things like, “I’ll pay you back later in a few days” or “You help me with this, I’ll belanja you to a nice lunch,” depends on the person saying these, some might just be an excuse to make you do his work or is just an excuse for the excuse but there is some who say these words out of genuinity . But under the Malaysian law, those kinds of promises can actually count as verbal contracts, as long as there’s a clear offer being made and the other accepts it. That’s where speech law plays a quiet but important role to both sides of the party. What you say out loud can have legal weight, even if there’s no written proof. In my friend’s case with the housemate and the electric bill, things got awkward simply because they never clearly agreed on how much “a little more” actually meant. No texts, no receipts—just assumptions. And once someone feels something’s unfair, it’s hard to go back and fix it. If the situation ever got serious, things like chat logs or witness statements could help, but it’s still messy. So while verbal agreements can work, they really depend on mutual trust—and even then, a quick message or written note can save everyone a lot of trouble later on. Written by Lim Guat Yun (1221302331)

[commonsense-101]

Things That Can Get You Sued That You Might Not Know!

Think you can say whatever you want online? Not exactly. Freedom of speech has limits—and crossing them can lead to a lawsuit. Here are a few ways your words might land you in legal trouble:

Defamation – Making false claims that damage someone’s reputation (even online) can get you sued.

Sharing Private Info – Posting personal details (like medical records or DMs) without consent? Risky.

False Light – Presenting someone in a misleading way, like using their photo next to a damaging headline.

Using Someone’s Image Without Permission – Especially for ads or promos. That’s called misappropriation.

Inciting Harm – Encouraging followers to attack or harass someone can have serious legal consequences.

Fake Reviews – Lying about a business or service, especially as a competitor, can lead to defamation or fraud claims.

Satire Gone Wrong – If your “joke” looks like a real accusation, it could still count as harmful falsehood.

🧠 Bottom line: Say what you want, but know the legal lines. Think before you post—it could save you from a lawsuit.

Written by Wong Sing Huey (1211101952)