OH, how ironic. Saifuddin Abdullah, our minister of communications failed miserably to communicate how the government intends to enforce the Perbadanan Kemajuan Filem Nasional Malaysia Act 1981, otherwise known as the Finas Act). The whole hullabaloo that ensued following his misstep is definitely moronic on the part of Perikatan Nasional. 

Kluang MP Wong Shu Qi raised a legitimate concern regarding the intended use of Finas Act on Al Jazeera’s infamous Locked Up in Malaysia’s Lockdown documentary. Regardless of your opinion on the piece, you have to admit that enforcing the current iteration of the Finas Act on the filmmakers will open up a can of worms which will cause an infestation across the nation. 

You see, what the Finas Act 1981 prescribes as “films” is based on the year of its gazetting’s interpretation. This include ‘any recording on material of any kind, including video tapes and video discs, of moving images, accompanied or unaccompanied by sound, for viewing by the public or any class of the public’. 

Even a marhaen, or layman, like me could see that this is too wide of a definition and that it is no longer relevant in this day and age. That’s why the Finas Act has been rendered to become nothing more than a symbolic law which exists but is never enforced. 

However, the Finas Act will wake up from hibernation should a minister bring it up in parliament with the intention of enforcing it. Make no mistake, Saifuddin is definitely no slouch in parliament or in Malaysian politics but his answer to a clear-cut question from both Wong and Lembah Pantai MP Fahmi Fadzil caused confusion nationally and made Malaysia a laughing stock globally. 

Despite the outpouring of outrage over the matter, which Saifuddin and PN have since U-turned on, it seems that many have missed the main issue here – why was the archaic Finas Act being cited in the first place? 

Given the circumstances, it’s fairly apparent that PN is intending to utilise Finas Act to stifle dissent as the Act prescribes ridiculous unchecked powers in terms of enforcement. Section 26 of the Act gives authority for arrest and search without warrant for merely being a suspect to be in breach of the Finas Act. 

If its current interpretation of “films” persists, then virtually everyone in Malaysia can be arrested under this act without a warrant. Practically, the government may arrest anyone who posts a video that criticises them. Why do you think Al Jazeera is suddenly cited under a law that was never enforced by any Malaysian government in recent history? 

That’s why the proposed amendment as announced by Saifuddin is of extreme importance. Would PN amend the powers of arrest as vested by the act in addition to updating its interpretation of what is deemed as films? Or would they leave it be so that they can abuse Finas Act as a sort of ‘ISA-lite’ in a blatant attempt to stifle our freedom of speech? 

The repealed Internal Security Act (ISA), just like the Finas Act was an archaic law irrelevant to modern times which the BN government of the past abused for suppressing any dissenting voices. Similarly, the Anti-Fake News Act 2018 which was ripe for abuse by the government was also repealed by Parliament on 19 December 2019. 

Back then, Saifuddin was one of the largest proponents of the latter’s repeal. Let’s hope for the sake of all Malaysians that the poster child for moderate Malaysia lives up to his reputation. – July 24, 2020.

* Saiful Ridzaimi reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.