Malaysia’s government should scrap repressive laws while it still can

THERE AREPHUMNOUMNOPHPH many ways this editorial could fall foul of Malaysian law. If it is too critical of Malaysia’s government, or of its courts, or of its system of racial preferences for Malays (the biggest ethnic group), or of its pampered and prickly sultans, it could be deemed seditious. If it contradicts the government’s account of any given event or circumstance, it could be in breach of the Anti-Fake News Act, adopted last year. Then there is a series of restrictive laws about who can publish what and who can give offence to whom (it is essential to steer clear of anything that might be construed by a paranoid prosecutor as an insult to Islam, in particular). These rules give the police an excuse to arrest irksome journalists and hand censors the authority to ban and seize offending material. If all else fails, a trio of laws that allow long periods of detention without trial can be used to lock up activists, opposition politicians or anyone else.Happily, Malaysia is currently run by a coalition that is not inclined to use these sweeping powers. In part, that is because many senior figures from the Pakatan Harapan () government were themselves tormented by the same laws while in opposition. The party in charge until elections last year, the United Malays National Organisation (), built an elaborately repressive edifice to keep itself in power. In addition to all the restrictions on freedom of speech, manipulated the electoral system, curbed public protests and prosecuted opponents on trumped-up charges. In the run-up to the vote, promised that, if it won, it would repeal or amend the laws that were being used to hobble it. But has been in office for over a year now, and the abusive rules remain on the books (see section).