MCMC challenged to specifically reveal nature of fake info by MUDA co-founder on Azam Baki

 

AN education enthusiast has stepped forward to defend MUDA co-founder Luqman Long in the wake of the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) having opened an investigation paper against the latter for spreading false information about the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

After personally reviewing the alleged TikTok video by Luqman, edupreneur Dr R. Siva Prakash contended that he could not find “clear elements of false information as alleged by MCMC”.

“In a mature democracy, accusations of ‘false information cannot be made in general terms without detailed explanations of which parts are inaccurate, what evidence contradicts them and the fact-checking standards applied,” he penned on X.

“More concerningly, the action of opening an investigation under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 against an individual who merely questions a public institution suggests that the law is being used to restrict public discourse, not to protect the truth.”

In a statement dated April 21, the multimedia watchdog claimed that an investigation paper had been opened “on an individual (Luqman) for uploading a fake content on MACC and its chief commissioner (Tan Sri Azam Baki)”.

According to MCMC, the investigation is carried out under Section 233 of the MCMC Act 1998 with the offence carrying a maximum fine of RM500,000 or a two-year jail term or both.

Luqman fights back

Delving further, Siva asserted that if false information truly exists, then MCMC is obliged to “(i) specifically state the incorrect facts; (ii) present an official correction that the public can verify; and (iii) transparently explain the basis of the investigation.

“Without such transparency, MCMC’s own statement risks becoming a narrative that misleads the public,” rebuked the advocate for educational integrity and TVET (technical and vocational education and training) transformation.

In this situation, the real question that arises is who is actually spreading inaccurate information to the people?

Enforcement institutions cannot act as unilateral arbiters of truth without accountability. If the standard of “false information” is applied loosely against the public, then the same principle must also apply to government agencies.

Malaysia needs transparency, not digital intimidation. The people have the right to ask. The people have the right to question. The people have the right to receive answers.

In a series of Facebook appearances admitting that he was the individual in the MCMC’s statement, Luqman who is currently a  political activist has hit out at the Madani administration for betraying the rakyat by concealing their freedom of speech.

“You can arrest me today and tomorrow yet I’ll still give my utmost cooperation … but the same can’t be said of hundred thousands of ordinary Malaysians who’re now fearful of making their voices heard because many so-called dissidents have been remanded,” acknowledged Luqman in his latest Facebook Reel video.

“They don’t wish to go through all these hassle … they only want to be critical for they believe Malaysia can better improve itself in terms of development and freedom.”

Aside from Siva, MUDA has also raised serious concerns over the MCMC handling of its investigation into Luqman by questioning the procedural conduct of the investigation as well as the way the case has been communicated publicly.

“On April 20, Luqman Long, accompanied by his lawyer Nurainie Haziqah Shafii, attended the MCMC office in an official capacity to assist with the on-going investigation,” the party pointed out in a recent statement.

“However, MCMC subsequently published a photograph of both of them on its official social media platforms without consent. The image was also edited with their faces blurred which contributed to a perception of wrongdoing before any formal conclusion of the investigation.”

MUDA also questioned the framing of the investigation, particularly MCMC’s reference to “false content” in its public statement.

The party stated that Luqman was called in for questioning over a video linked to an issue involving Azam but during the questioning process, he was not informed that the matter involved alleged false content, raising questions about the consistency between investigative procedures and how the issue was communicated publicly.

As such, MUDA claimed that these developments highlight broader concerns over how investigations are handled and presented to the public, especially when they involve matters of significant public interest.

“Following the incident, two police reports were lodged, one by Luqman’s lawyer on April 20 and another by Luqman himself the following day. The situation has raised broader concerns that go beyond a technical matter, centring instead on possible abuse of power by a government agency.” – Focus Malaysia