When so easily Malaysia can 'spy' on us...Malaysians - where is our right of privacy?

Yes, in Malaysia the police can

(a) to intercept, detain and open any postal article in the course of transmission by post;
(b) to intercept any message transmitted or received by any communication; or
(c) to intercept, listen to or record any conversation by communication

and all this when the Public Prosecutor believes it is likely to contain any information relating to the commission of an offence

- Well, it is with regard to ANY offence which is not right - this is unacceptable and even if this power is to be given to the police it must be for really serious offences ...

- Well, it really should not be based on the authorization of the Public Prosecutor - but really it should require at the very least a High Court Judge > if not, it can be so easily abused..

The Minister says that is has not been used against politicians - that is not important, it should not be used against any person - where is our RIGHT OF PRIVACY - Malaysia looks more and more not like a democracy....

And guess what, this power to 'spy' on people became law just in 2012... it is a new draconian piece of legislation...

Now intercept means 'To stop, deflect, or interrupt the progress or intended course of...' - so does this also mean that they can stop mail, emails, etc??? 

I have posted items to people and they did not receive it - was it the police intercepting?

I have not been receiving some emails people have sent, or people have not received some of my emails? Is it the police doing this? 

Important questions to ask...  

 

Nancy Shukri: Cops allowed to intercept calls, mails

by yuen meikeng AND hemananthani sivanandam

Nancy Shukri - File pix

KUALA LUMPUR: The police are able to intercept communication on the approval of the Public Prosecutor if there is any information related to an offence, said Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nancy Shukri.

She said the Public Prosecutor was empowered under Section 116C of the Criminal Procedure Code to make any interception by the police.

"Among the ways communication may be intercepted include withholding and opening any packages sent via postal services, intercepting messages sent or received through telecommunication and tap or record conversations using telecommunications," she said in a written reply to Liew Chin Tong (DAP - Kluang) on Monday. 

Liew had asked the number of cases allowed by the Public Prosecutor to intercept emails, telecommunications and posts of politicians, criminal suspects and the public between 1998 and this year. 

Nancy said such provisions were also found in Section 27A of the Dangerous Drugs Act 1952, Section 11 of the Kidnapping Act 1961, Section 43 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009 and Section 6 of the Security Offences (Special Measures) 2012.

"Since 2009, no communication interception was done involving politicians. 

"Communication interception has been requested from time to time during intelligence gathering and investigations by the police and other enforcement authorities," she said. 

She said requests to do so normally do not refer to any specific subject but it was more towards communication that needed to be intercepted for the purpose of information and evidence gathering in criminal investigations. - Star, 16/6/2014, Nancy Shukri: Cops allowed to intercept calls, mails

Section 116C - Criminal Procedure Code (in force since 31 July 2012) - brought in by amendment in 2012

116C  Interception of communication and admissibility of intercepted communications.

(1) Notwithstanding any written law to the contrary, the Public Prosecutor, if he considers that it is likely to contain any information relating to the commission of an offence, may authorize a police officer-

(a) to intercept, detain and open any postal article in the course of transmission by post;
(b) to intercept any message transmitted or received by any communication; or
(c) to intercept, listen to or record any conversation by communication.

(2) The Public Prosecutor, if he considers that any communication is likely to contain any information relating to the commission of an offence, may-

(a) require a communications service provider to intercept and retain a specified communication or communications of a specified description received or transmitted, or about to be received or transmitted by that communications service provider; or
(b) authorize a police officer to enter any premises and to install on such premises, any device for the interception and retention of a specified communication or communications of a specified description and to remove and retain such device.

(3) Where any person is charged with an offence, any information obtained under subsection (1) or (2), whether before or after such person is charged, shall be admissible in evidence at his trial.

(4) An authorization by the Public Prosecutor under this section may be given either orally or in writing, but if an oral authorization is given, the Public Prosecutor shall as soon as practicable reduce the authorization in writing.

(5) The Court shall take cognizance of any authorization by the Public Prosecutor under this section.