KUALA LUMPUR, March 26 — Lawyers have questioned the function of the Anti-Fake News Bill 2018, saying that some of its clauses are similar to existing laws.

"It is absolutely unnecessary. The issue can be addressed by means of civil litigation,” lawyer Surendra Ananth said.

"(Moreover), it provides huge gaps for abuse. Fake news is not defined (and) this (proposed) Act allows the government to be the arbiter of what amounts to the "truth",” he added.

He also pointed that some clauses of the Bill specifically overlapped with Section 8A of the Printing Press and Publications Act 1984 (PPPA).

The only difference from this Section to the Bill, Surendra said, was that the former required the prosecutor to show evidence of malice.

"Malice can be rebutted if it can be shown reasonable steps were taken to verify the truth of the news.

"The fake news Bill does not require proof of malice. Knowledge is sufficient,” he said.

Although the PPPA was passed to tackle matters related with the business of the media industry, Surendra said the Anti-Fake News Act, if passed, will affect the media’s freedom of speech.

He said publishers and editors will not be spared from this proposed law, adding that "anything can be fake news” with the discretion of the government.

Like Surendra, criminal lawyer Salim Bashir Baskaran said the proposed Act does not specify what amounts to "fake news", adding that the illustrations listed under the Act was "narrow and not exhaustive”.

"The concern is primarily on who decides what is ‘fake news’ before one is arrested and hauled to court.

"The term ‘fake news’ cannot import the notion of exclusivity on the part of ‘Authorities’ to decide, and be rendered subjective,” he said.

The Bill listed eight scenarios where a person can be charged for spreading fake news.

Salim also expressed similar concern about the implementation of the law, which could lead to an abuse of power by the government.

"The Bill also seems to suggest that the government order obtained via ex parte application cannot be set aside unlike of an individual,” he said.

Surendra and Salim also felt that the punishment imposed under the proposed law was "a little too steep” for someone who had been convicted for spreading fake news.

A person convicted under the proposed law can be charged and slapped with a fine up of to RM500,000 or jailed up to 10 years, or both.

Those found guilty of persisting in spreading fake news will be further subject to a fine of RM100,000 if they fail to remove such publications and a fine of RM3,000 for every day the "offence” continues to be committed.

"The punishment in itself is very excessive and disproportionate… there is no apparent harm here,” Surendra said.

"Citizens should be allowed to make their own choice in an age where verification can be done easily. Even if there is any harm, the punishment is excessive,” he said.

Lawyers for Liberty’s Eric Paulsen described the Bill as an "overbroad piece of legislation” that exaggerates the problem of fake news, and does not clearly define the stipulated offences.

"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 said in a statement.

Paulsen called for the Bill to be discarded to prevent the government from abusing its powers by using another law as a tool to shut dissidents.

"Given the government’s track record of misusing the Sedition Act 1948, Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, Penal Code and Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 to prosecute the Opposition and dissidents, it would be foolish to imagine any bona fide intent behind this Bill, all the more so, with the General Election just around the corner,” he said.

Putrajaya tabled its Anti-Fake News Bill 2018 for the first reading in Parliament today after the Cabinet approved its draft last Wednesday.

The proposed law seeks to penalise those who create, offer, circulate, print and publish fake news or publications containing fake.

It also stated that any person who directly or indirectly provides financial aid intending it be used for the purpose of facilitating the offence can also be fined up to RM500,000, or jailed up to 10 years, or both upon conviction.

Anyone found guilty of abetment will also face the same punishment provided for the offence.

The Sessions Court may also order a police officer or an authorised officer under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 to take necessary measures to remove such publication through an ex-parte application made by the person affected by the publication of the fake news.