Suruhanjaya Komunikasi Dan Multimedia Malaysia (MCMC), Cyberjaya v 1. ) INDIVIDU YANG TIDAK DIKENALI (Pentadbir Saluran Telegram 'Edisi Siasat') 2. ) INDIVIDU YANG TIDAK DIKENALI (Pentadbir Saluran Telegram 'Edisi Khas') 3. ) TELEGRAM MESSENGER INC

Case Significance

Illustrates the grant of an Erinford injunction to preserve the effect of an existing restraint on harmful online content pending appeal, so that the appeal is not rendered nugatory by continued or slightly altered dissemination.

This High Court decision at Kuala Lumpur concerns an application for an Erinford injunction to preserve the status quo pending appeal in proceedings brought by a regulator against the operators of anonymous online channels and a messaging platform. The plaintiff, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission, had sued the administrators of two Telegram channels, sued as persons unknown, together with Telegram Messenger Inc, a licensed messaging-service provider under the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, alleging that they were responsible, directly or indirectly, for publishing and disseminating false, malicious and offensive content. After an inter partes hearing, the court had earlier granted a prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from further publishing or disseminating the two channels, which had amassed a substantial audience, but had declined to grant mandatory injunctions compelling the closure of those channels and any future similar channels. The plaintiff appealed against the refusal of the mandatory relief and sought an Erinford injunction to preserve the position pending that appeal. The court explained that the purpose of an Erinford injunction is to preserve the integrity and efficacy of the court's earlier order and to prevent the appeal from being rendered nugatory. It expressed concern that the platform should not be permitted, once aware of the injunctive restraints, to allow the same kind of harmful material to proliferate merely because it was newly uploaded or slightly altered in form or link, observing that compliance with court orders must be both procedural and substantive and reflect the real effect intended rather than the literal minimum. The court also remarked that counsel for a foreign-based platform operator, though perhaps unfamiliar with the nation's social fabric, ought to exercise a measure of sensitivity and respect towards the constitutional and societal context in which the court operates. On that basis the court granted the Erinford injunction to hold the position pending appeal. The judgment is a useful illustration of an Erinford injunction being granted to preserve the effect of an existing online-content restraint pending appeal.