Kuala lumpur: The government has filed an application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court regarding the Court of Appeal’s ruling that declared the words ‘offensive’ and ‘annoy’ under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (Act 588) as unconstitutional and invalid.

According to BERNAMA News Agency, Communications Minister Datuk Fahmi Fadzil stated that the Court of Appeal’s decision applies only to the provisions of Section 233 before the amendment of Act 588. Last year, the government amended Section 233, replacing the word ‘offensive’ with ‘grossly offensive’ to set a higher standard for constituting an offence.

The Court of Appeal delivered its decision on August 19. The government acknowledges the ruling and has reviewed it from constitutional and legal perspectives. Based on advice from the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), an application for leave to appeal to the Federal Court has been filed. Fahmi emphasized the importance of awaiting the Federal Court’s decision before making any determinations regarding the elements of ‘offensive’ and ‘annoy’ in the provisions of Section 233 prior to the amendment.

During a question and answer session at the Dewan Rakyat, Fahmi responded to an inquiry by Syahredzan Johan (PH-Bangi) about the government’s stance on the Court of Appeal’s decision. Fahmi highlighted that the amendment to Section 233 aims to prevent misuse and ensure compliance with constitutional standards. The AGC retains the authority to take action on prosecutions that have already been initiated.

Fahmi also addressed ongoing cases, indicating that it is the prerogative of the AGC to decide on prosecutorial actions. He noted that the Ministry of Communications views the amendment as elevating the standard to ‘grossly offensive’ rather than merely ‘offensive.’ The amendment includes six descriptions within Section 233 to guide the public prosecutor, defense, and judiciary during the adjudication process.

Fahmi was responding to Datuk Dr Ahmad Marzuk Shaary (PN-Pengkalan Chepa) concerning the potential impact on ongoing cases following the Court of Appeal’s decision on Section 233 of Act 588. The Court of Appeal unanimously ruled on August 19 that the terms “offensive” and “annoy” under Section 233 were unconstitutional but specified that the decision would have a prospective effect to prevent reopening past cases. The ruling followed an appeal by activist Heidy Quah Gaik Li, who challenged the validity of parts of the previous Communications and Multimedia Act 1998.