Legal Hurdles in Freedom of Information in Malaysia

Ikhsan, Muhammad Izwan

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2470291

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On this note, the government administration and financial burden will increase. Ikhsan (2014) believed that the problem of FOI is about implementation. For example, the FOI is still subject to various restrictions that hinder the concept of maximum disclosure.…”

Section: Conceptual Framework Of Foimentioning

confidence: 99%

Freedom of Information in Malaysia: International Legal Instruments and Restrictions Under National Law

Abdul Hadi,

Abdul Rahman,

Ayub

2024

UUMJLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The acceptance of Freedom of Information (FOI) as a fundamental mechanism for enhancing accountability and transparency in the public sector is widely recognized. Numerous international legal instruments (Conventions) have advocated for the establishment and enforcement of legal frameworks pertaining to the FOI. The FOI legislation serves two essential functions, namely enhancing democratic engagement and mitigating corruption within the public sphere. Despite the acceptability of FOI on the global stage, Malaysia lacks a comprehensive legal framework to address the right to access information, except for Selangor and Penang. Additionally, there are various national legislations that hinder the exercise of FOI. This article’s objective is to examine the use of the FOI concept within the framework of international legal instruments as well as the challenges posed by Malaysian national laws that impose limitations on its implementation. The objective is achieved by employing a doctrinal methodology that incorporates international legal instruments as well as Malaysia’s legislations (Constitution, Acts and Enactments) pertaining to the FOI. The findings show the restrictions under national law make it difficult to implement FOI legal regimes in Malaysia. This paper argues that implementing FOI can only be materialized through a comprehensive review of existing laws and administrative structure reform by adapting universal standards on FOI as stated under international legal instruments. This article serves as guidelines for policymakers intending to address FOI as the anti-corruption mechanism in public sectors. Moreover, recommendations are made for the implementation of FOI into Malaysia’s domestic laws.

show abstract

Section: Conceptual Framework Of Foimentioning

confidence: 99%

Freedom of Information in Malaysia: International Legal Instruments and Restrictions Under National Law

Abdul Hadi,

Abdul Rahman,

Ayub

2024

UUMJLS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Literature on the right to information in Malaysia widely report the lacuna in this area of law due to the absence of constitutional provisions and sui generis law at federal level to enable, protect and promote the right to information (Venkiteswaran, 2010;Ikhsan, 2014;Eusoff, 2018). Haas (2016) reports on the Malaysian Official Secrets Act 1972 that prohibits the right to impart PSI classified by the Government as confidential, regardless of the public interest justifications. Steven (2016) reviews the Freedom of Information Enactment introduced by Selangor and Penang, the only two states in Malaysia that enact freedom of information law.…”

Section: Literature Reviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey on Statutory Reform for the Right to Impart Public Sector Information in Malaysia

Hashim

Mahmood

2019

International Journal of Asian Social Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the research is to propose a statutory reform for the right to impart public sector information (PSI) in Malaysia. Malaysia neither have a specific law nor constitutional provisions for the right to information. As former British colony, Malaysia inherits secrecy, sedition, printing and publication laws that impede the exercise of the right. The research conducts a survey involving respondents representing government agency, independent statutory body, civil society and academia. The survey is aimed at finding statutory measures deemed appropriate for statutory reform of the right to impart PSI in Malaysia. Prior to the survey, the research analysed various statutory measures enabling, protecting and promoting the right to impart PSI from selected Commonwealth countries. These statutory analyses become the basis for the development of the survey instrument of the research. The survey instrument covers 11 statutory measures for reform in six critical areas of law i.e. constitutional, secrecy, sedition, publication, whistleblower and evidence laws. The findings of the survey indicate that all 11 statutory measures are deemed appropriate for statutory reform of the right to impart PSI in Malaysia. The findings further indicate that statutory reform is necessary for three colonial era laws i.e. secrecy, sedition and evidence laws. Statutory reform is also found to be necessary for three other postcolonial laws i.e. constitution, publication and whistleblower laws. The findings of the survey have been used as an input in the proposed statutory reform for the right to impart PSI in Malaysia. Contribution/ Originality: This study is one of very few studies which have investigated the right to impart PSI in Malaysia. The paper's primary contribution is the findings that statutory reform is necessary for three colonial era laws (secrecy, sedition and evidence laws) and three post-colonial laws (constitution, publication and whistleblower laws).

show abstract

“…As far as Malaysia is concerned, review of literature also found that previous studies mostly report about the absence of constitutional and legislative protection for the right to information in Malaysia (see, Low, 2015;Muhamad Izwan, 2014, Commonwealth Initiative for Human Rights, 2011, Venkiteswaran, 2010. Several studies were also made on the Freedom of Information Enactment of the states of Selangor and Penang whereby these studies found that the enactments are subject to federal laws including those laws which impede citizens' right to information (Bhatt, 2011, The Constitution Unit UCL, 2011.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%