Journalists, activists, and politicians protest the suspension of a magazine which published a corruption expose involving top government officials in 2015. Flickr photo by Sham Hardy (CC BY-SA 2.0) Malaysia's parliament passed the “Anti-Fake News Law” on April 3, 2018 amid concerns that the law will be used to silence the opposition and critics ahead of the General Election (GE14), which will take place in the near term. On the heels of the law's approval, Prime Minister Najib Razak dissolved the parliament on April 6, in another move seen as part of a strategy for securing his own re-election. Malaysia’s ruling coalition has held power since the 1950s, but recent events have cast doubt over its staying power. The PM has been linked to several corruption cases which could undermine the electoral chances of his party. These include accusations that he channeled more than two billion Malaysian Ringgit (nearly USD $700 million) from the 1MDB government economic development company to his personal bank account, a story that was widely reported by local media and denounced by the ruling party. Malaysia is the first Asian country to pass an anti-fake news law, though similar policies have been considered in the Philippines and Cambodia. More than 11,000 people signed online petitions opposing the Malaysian law. The government insists that the new law is necessary to combat fake news and protect the reputation of innocent people. But various groups argue that the law could undermine free speech and other civil liberties. The law defines fake news as “any news, information, data and reports, which is or wholly or partly false, whether in the form of features, visuals or audio recordings or in any other form capable of suggesting words or ideas”. For critics of the law, this definition is too vague and can be easily abused by authorities. Those found guilty of publishing fake news content could serve a prison term of up to six years and be ordered to pay a fine of up to 500,000 Malaysian Ringgit (UDS $129,000). Third-party apps, website administrators, and online forum moderators are also held liable if they do not swiftly remove fake news content that is uploaded and distributed via their platforms. The law allows any person to petition a local court for the removal of a fake news content. If the court decides in favor of the petitioner, the order can be served by sending it to the social media accounts of the accused. The government can expedite the application for the removal of a fake news content if it involves public order or national security. Abetting and funding the publication of fake news are also criminalized under the law. The wording of this part of the law could be subject to broad interpretation, to include subscription to news websites or even crowd-sourcing initiatives. The law also intends to prosecute persons and companies promoting fake news about Malaysia, even if the accused is living or operating outside the country. Eric Paulsen of the local Lawyers for Liberty group described the law as the “death knell for freedom of speech and the press in Malaysia”: It is an extremely vague Bill: it does not clearly define the malicious falsehood required for the offence, the severity of the ‘fake news’ required before attracting criminal culpability, or the defences that are open to persons accused of publishing ‘fake news’. He is concerned that the overly broad definition of fake news as stipulated in the law could outright criminalize the work of journalists and researchers: This Bill threatens to make a mockery of this cornerstone of our democratic rights by declaring all news regardless of the content, whether it is serious or trivial, that are wholly or partly false as a crime, unless of course the authorities determine otherwise. George Varughese of the Malaysian Bar compares the broad scope of the law to terrorism-related laws and labels it as “legislative overkill”: Sensitivities about the reputation of Malaysia by way of negative comments and criticisms can now be attacked through an extremely wide extra-territorial application of the proposed legislation, putting this in the same category as international terrorism, cross-border corruption, money-laundering, and trafficking in persons. While this issue should not be ignored, the proposed broad-based law to criminalise the dissemination of news amounts to legislative overkill. Several analysts also argued that the government can address the fake news problem by reviewing the country’s laws on slander, libel and defamation.