Aliff Syukri bin Kamarzaman

Aliff Syukri bin Kamarzaman

Although the prosecution established a prima facie case that the accused owned and administered the Instagram account and that the videos were indecent under MCMC/JAKIM guidelines (and that intention to annoy could be inferred), the court was bound by the Court of Appeal decision in Heidy Quah holding that the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in s.233 CMA are unconstitutional; consequently the prosecution could not be maintained under that provision and the accused was acquitted and discharged.

Citation
BK-63-14-10/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Parties
Prosecution: Pendakwa Raya; Accused: Aliff Syukri bin Kamarzaman
Court
Sessions Court
Jurisdiction
Malaysia
Judgment Date
27 August 2025
Case Number
BK-63-14-10/2022 (Mahkamah Sesyen)
Procedural Posture
Criminal — Offence Under Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 S.233 / Judgment — Acquittal (prosecution Filed Notice of Appeal)
Outcome
Accused acquitted and discharged of charges under s.233(1)(a) Communications and Multimedia Act 1998
Legal Topics
Section 233 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, Section 114 a Evidence Act 1950 (rebuttable Presumption), Freedom of Expression (article 10), Prima Facie Burden of Proof, Content Classification and Censorship
Source Language
Malay/English
Criminal Law Communications Law Constitutional Law Evidence Law Section 233 Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 Section 114 a Evidence Act 1950 (rebuttable Presumption) Freedom of Expression (article 10) Prima Facie Burden of Proof +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Pendakwa Raya

Prosecution

Aliff Syukri bin Kamarzaman

Accused

Procedural Posture

Criminal — Offence Under Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 S.233 / Judgment — Acquittal (prosecution Filed Notice of Appeal)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the accused was the publisher/uploader of the four Instagram videos
  2. 2 Whether the four videos amounted to indecent/sumbang content
  3. 3 Whether the accused had the requisite intention to annoy or cause hurt

Ratio Decidendi

Although the prosecution established a prima facie case that the accused owned and administered the Instagram account and that the videos were indecent under MCMC/JAKIM guidelines (and that intention to annoy could be inferred), the court was bound by the Court of Appeal decision in Heidy Quah holding that the words 'offensive' and 'annoy' in s.233 CMA are unconstitutional; consequently the prosecution could not be maintained under that provision and the accused was acquitted and discharged.

Court Disposition

Accused acquitted and discharged of charges under s.233(1)(a) Communications and Multimedia Act 1998

Orders

  • Accused Aliff Syukri bin Kamarzaman is acquitted and discharged from all charges under s.233(1)(a) CMA
  • Prosecution's notice of appeal against the acquittal is noted