ONSA Does Not Restrict Cyber Users' Right To Freedom Of Expression - Lawyers

By Nur Aimidiyana Zuher

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 1 (Bernama) -- The Online Safety Act 2025 (ONSA) serves as a legal mechanism to curb the spread of harmful online content by placing clear responsibilities on digital platforms and intermediaries, rather than punishing users, according to legal practitioners.

Lawyer Muhammad Akram Abdul Aziz said the law was enacted to protect users in cyberspace, particularly from high-risk content such as digital fraud, child sexual exploitation, cyberbullying and information that could threaten public order.

“Any restriction must be based on clear and reasonable criteria so that freedom of expression is not denied outright. Action should only be taken against content that is clearly harmful or high-risk, while legitimate opinions, criticism and public debate must continue to be protected,” he told Bernama.

Gazetted on May 22 and coming into force today, ONSA introduces a more proactive regulatory framework by imposing explicit obligations on platforms to manage high-risk content, including child sexual abuse material, pornography, obscene content and content related to self-harm.

Muhammad Akram warned that perceptions of curtailed free speech could arise if the law is enforced without transparency, stressing the need for proper training and clear guidelines to prevent excessive enforcement.

Echoing this view, lawyer Siti Nor Syahidah Ismail said ONSA does not abolish freedom of expression but sets reasonable boundaries to prevent abuse, while addressing the spread of harmful content through platform governance and risk management.

“ONSA prioritises user safety rather than restricting free speech. Claims that the law aims to silence public voices are inaccurate and do not reflect the real digital threats today. The real dangers are scams, child exploitation and hate speech,” she said.

She also noted that the law clearly places legal obligations on platform providers to implement reasonable preventive measures.

Meanwhile, lawyer Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent cautioned that without transparent and balanced safeguards, ONSA could risk over-censorship of legitimate public discourse, despite its core objective of protecting users.

He said the law’s implications for freedom of expression must be carefully managed in line with Article 10(2) of the Federal Constitution, which allows restrictions only when necessary and proportionate.

“ONSA is justified as it provides a specific framework to address increasingly complex cyber threats. However, its legitimacy depends on transparent, principled enforcement.

“Continuous oversight by an independent body is crucial to ensure the law serves security objectives without undermining freedom of expression,” he said.

Sharing a similar stance, lawyer Nursyafiqah Mohd Desa said ONSA reflects the government’s efforts to regulate and filter social media use without denying constitutional freedoms.

She stressed that freedom of expression is not absolute and must be balanced against national security, public order, morality and the rights of others, as provided under Article 10(2).

“While the internet and social media offer space for debate and information-sharing, this freedom must be exercised responsibly and guided by moral values. Some level of regulation and control is therefore necessary to safeguard security, public order and societal morals,” she said.

Nursyafiqah added that ONSA is not intended to suppress or oppress public voices, but to ensure freedom of expression is exercised safely and responsibly.

-- BERNAMA