Muda questions MCMC's handling of probe into Luqman Long, alleges public perception bias

SHAH ALAM - Muda has raised serious concerns over the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission’s (MCMC) handling of its investigation into activist Luqman Long under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act (CMA) 1998.

The party questioned the procedural conduct of the investigation as well as the way the case has been communicated publicly.

It also alleged issues of procedural opacity, the publication of images without consent and the potential misuse of investigative processes that could influence public perception against individuals under investigation.

“On April 20, Luqman Long, accompanied by his lawyer Nurainie Haziqah Shafii, attended the MCMC office in an official capacity to assist with the ongoing investigation.

“However, MCMC subsequently published a photograph of both of them on its official social media platforms without consent.

“The image was also edited with their faces blurred, which contributed to a perception of wrongdoing before any formal conclusion of the investigation,” the party said in a statement.

Muda also questioned the framing of the investigation, particularly MCMC’s reference to “false content” in its public statement.

The party stated that Luqman was called in for questioning over a video linked to an issue involving Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki.

However, during the questioning process, he was not informed that the matter involved alleged false content, raising questions about the consistency between investigative procedures and how the issue was communicated publicly.

Muda said these developments highlight broader concerns over how investigations are handled and presented to the public, especially when they involve matters of significant public interest.

“Following the incident, two police reports were lodged, one by Luqman’s lawyer on April 20 and another by Luqman himself the following day. The situation has raised broader concerns that go beyond a technical matter, centring instead on possible abuse of power by a government agency.

“It has also been linked to a recurring pattern where individuals under investigation are publicly associated with alleged wrongdoing through official imagery and framing before due process is completed.

“Critics argue that this includes the release of images without consent and the shaping of public narratives in a way that could influence perception against those involved,” Muda said.

The party further argued that such approaches risk diverting attention from underlying issues raised regarding institutional accountability and governance concerns.

Muda also stressed that MCMC should not be used to shield individuals from criticism, particularly in matters of public interest involving the Azam Baki case.

Muda urged Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim and the Pakatan Harapan government to reconsider the continued use of restrictive legal provisions against public critics.

The party called for the government to honour its earlier manifesto commitment to review and repeal laws perceived as limiting freedom of expression, including Section 233 of CMA 1998.

“Malaysia should not evolve into a system where individuals are penalised for expressing dissenting views while those in positions of authority remain insulated from accountability,” Muda stressed.

Context of Section 233 CMA 1998

Section 233 of CMA is commonly used in Malaysia to investigate and prosecute cases involving alleged improper use of network facilities or online content deemed offensive, false or malicious.

The provision has frequently been the subject of public debate, particularly regarding its scope and application in cases involving political commentary and public discourse.