This story from Dubai, grossly underplayed in Malaysia but which got big attention elsewhere, should captivate most men the world over. It came last Thursday and read: “A woman has been fined and faces deportation after a court in the United Arab Emirates convicted her of reading text messages on her husband’s phone.”
Oh dear. Could this ever happen in this country? Not that I wish it should, otherwise I could be condemned as a sexist and a horde of women would jump on and possibly maim me.
Anyway, the agency story quoting Gulf News, added: “The unnamed woman, an Arab expatriate living with her husband in the UAE, accused her partner of cheating after looking at his conversations, and she then sent illicit photos from his phone to hers via WhatsApp to use them as evidence. Both husband and wife were in their 30s.
“The husband reacted by immediately reporting her to the police. His wife was handed a £28,000 fine (RM168,000) and faces expulsion from the country.
“The court in Ajman, a provincial capital near Dubai, prosecuted her under cybercrime laws which prohibit the transfer of photos or electronic information without the owner’s permission.
“The 2012 Federal Decree-Law No. 5 stipulates that accessing someone else’s phone carries a prison sentence of at least six months, but the court decided deportation was the more appropriate punishment.”
What’s even more interesting is that the story came just a week after a news report in The Independent that said: “Women in Saudi Arabia face flogging and imprisonment if they check their husband’s phone without permission.”
While some of us are aghast and others get amused at such reports, this issue about invasion of privacy is very serious. Its implication or significance goes way beyond the chuckles, especially under present circumstances in Malaysia.
The matter, in fact, came up for discussion not too long ago at a forum organised by the Bar Council, tending to questions such as to what extent should such privacy protection be given; whether there is a need to distinguish between a private individual as opposed to a public figure; whether exceptions to such protection should apply to persons holding public office; and an individual’s right to freedom of expression.
I still greatly believe that privacy protection is a double-edged sword, especially in Malaysia today.
The most clear-cut cases of invasion of privacy perhaps involve those of breach of confidence in connection with doctor-patient or lawyer-client relationships. Also, the divulgence of a persons’s banking details without his consent as provided for under the Banking and Financial Institutions Act 1989 (Bafia).
Then there are various other laws that a person can rely on to protect his privacy. For example, if there is a pre-existing relationship (contractual/professional) between A and B, B by divulging certain private information about A, may be liable for a breach of confidence.
Or, if another person is making baseless accusations against you to a third party, you can sue for defamation. Apart from that, misuse of another person’s personal details may also be a criminal offence under the Personal Data Protection Act which came into force less than three years ago. Under this law, personal data is defined as any information collected or processed in connection to a commercial transaction by any equipment operating automatically (e.g., ATM, computers, credit cards) which is capable of identifying a person. The above definition will include such information as names, addresses, identification card/passport numbers, email addresses, telephone numbers, as well as banking details.
Of course, there are many other ways we see nowadays that could be used to prevent data and information from being disclosed. The Official Secrets Act is one. The equally wide-ranging law on sedition is another.
On the other side of the coin, many people feel that while privacy laws are necessary, especially when your phones and computers get taken away on the pretext of an investigation, there is a pressing need to have a balance, especially when it comes to dealing with terror-related crimes, corruption and money laundering.
This could be where the elusive Freedom Of Information Act is necessary. But, apart from this law being enacted in certain states, its enactment at federal level appears to be at a standstill.
But, that Dubai story...
Syed Nadzri is a former NST group editor
