Tripped up by blog comments

Besides being arrested, Tan’s desktop computer, laptop, mobile phone, CDs and some documents, were also seized from his house.

Tan was interrogated by the cybercrime division on grounds of publishing accusations based on documents protected under the Official Secrets Act 1972 (OSA) as the identity of the commentator remained unknown.

He was released without being charged.

However, he might not be as fortunate in the event something similar occurs again.

In April, the Evidence Act was amended to include Section 114A which, among others, presumes owners of registered networks, devices, websites and portals to be the publishers of any seditious or offensive content until proved otherwise, and they will be held liable for said content.

The provision came into effect on July 31 despite fierce opposition that the law stifles Internet freedom and was vulnerable to abuse as it covers a broad scope of wrongdoings.

Some of the more grievous concerns raised against Section 114A are the fact that it shifts the burden of proof on the accused, akin to prosecution against individuals in drug-related offenses.

Tan escaped the ordeal of having to go through a trial, not just because there was no evidence to show that he violated Section 8 of the OSA which deals with “wrongful communication” of “official secrets”, but also the lack of a precise legislation to nail him for the anonymous content on his website.

But for him, the four-day detention was a good enough experience to make sure that he moderates all comments on his blog.

“Although, the original comment in question was actually longer, I had already deleted parts of it I found to be without evidence long before my arrest,” he said relating his experience to fz.com in an email interview recently.

At that time, in dealing with the police Tan noted that “the police did not understand how the Internet works” as he was the “best suspect” to prove their case.

“I fear greatly that my arrest, despite the non-existent ties between the accusations against Johari and myself, portend badly for Malaysia’s ability to deal with true cybercrime.

“In my particular case as well, the government and police appear to be sending a signal that while irresponsible bloggers roam free, responsible bloggers who moderate their comments and put a name to their writing are more likely to end up as targets. This policy could not possibly be more ill-formed and counterproductive,” he said in a statement released right after his release.

Coming back to consequences of the new provision, Tan opined that it is meant to intimidate online activists in Malaysia considering the evolution of technology today.

“Any friend can ‘borrow’ your smartphone and so on. It is impossible to say for sure who made a posting on your Facebook wall or wrote a tweet under your account.