THE attorney-general had in the past constantly criticised and condemned the Official Secrets Act, proven in the attorney-general’s previous write-ups and articles and his recently published book, Abuse of Power: Selected Works on the Law and Constitution.

Among others, I agreed with the attorney-general when he consistently said that the act was drafted in the widest possible terms and is not limited in its operation to spies, saboteurs, traitors, and mercenaries. The term “official secret” is also not defined in the act. That means the minister can redefine “official secret” in any manner he likes.

In addition, the act had and will take away the citizens’ freedom to receive information, which in turn substantially diminishes our constitutional freedom of speech and expression, in particular infringing Article 10(1)(a) of the federal constitution.

Hence, Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s recent remarks that the Official Secrets Act is to remain will create a climate of fear over the minds of all persons, especially civil servants.  They will be afraid to express or reveal any view and evidence on any possible wrongdoing of the government.

Therefore, I support the National Human Rights Society’s recent stand and do not see valid or legitimate grounds for retaining the Official Secrets Act. It should be repealed and replaced with a properly drafted Freedom of Information Act.

In short, our freedom of speech and expression remains restricted, as was practised by the previous government, i.e. the status quo.

* Andy Yong is a lawyer and the Youth deputy chief of Gerakan.

* 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.