In May 2023, the Home Ministry conducted raids on several outlets of a popular Swiss watch brand, Swatch. It has been reported that more than 150 watches were seized under the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 (“PPPA”).
The Home Minister has since attempted to justify these seizures, saying that the watches featured inscribed references to minority sexual and gender identities. However, Swatch Group is reported to have said that the watches seized by the Home Ministry were part of the Swiss watchmaker’s “Pride Collection” which was designed to honour the pride movement and its message of equality and diversity.
The PPPA is a law to regulate matters relating to printing presses and publications. Aside from written and audio publications, the PPPA covers any visible representation or anything capable of suggesting words or ideas.[1]
The Home Ministry seems to be taking wide and unusual interpretation that a watch (or its component) is a “publication”. The use of the PPPA should not be extended with a never-ending reach. Surely, a line ought to be drawn between a book and the design on a watch dial. No stretch of imagination is needed to see how the PPPA might apply to a book publisher. As to the seized Swatch watches, it is baffling that a law intended to control printing presses and publications could be used to seize fashion accessories, which are of a different product category entirely.
Prior to this incident, there have been calls for the PPPA to be repealed due to fears that the Home Minister’s wide powers pose a threat to freedom of expression.[2]
Even if the Home Ministry is able to show that watches are governed by the PPPA, the Home Ministry can only seize publications after an order of prohibition has been issued. The law allows the Home Minister to prohibit publications that go against public order, morality, security, public interest or national interest, which are called “undesirable publications”. Once the Home Minister prohibits these undesirable publications, the law allows authorities to search for and seize these undesirable publications.
As at the time of writing this article, it would appear that no such order of prohibition has been made. Hence, the seized Swatch watches cannot be said to be undesirable publications and should not be prohibited from sale.
Putting the procedural aspect aside, the core issue is whether there is any basis to declare that the seized Swatch watches are undesirable publications. Even though the law grants the Home Minister wide powers to do so, the law does not allow unreasonable exercise of these powers. In such situations, it is possible to review the decision of the Home Minister through a court process called Judicial Review.
This has been done in the past, for example when the Home Minister prohibited 4 books written by an academician on the basis that those books were prejudicial to public order and security.[3] In an appeal from a Judicial Review, the Court of Appeal noted that there was no evidence that the publication of those books had caused any chaos or disorder in the country, despite having been in circulation. The Court of Appeal went on to declare that the Home Minister’s order of prohibition was illegal and highlighted that fundamental rights could only be suppressed in the clearest case of potential prejudice to public order.
As it appears now, the Home Ministry’s storming actions against Swatch are questionable. It is high time that the reign of draconian laws such as the PPPA are reviewed. Until then, the cloud of the PPPA will continue to loom over, leaving many patiently awaiting the rainbow after the storm.
[1] S. 2, Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984
[2] Saifuddin slammed for U-turn on Printing Presses and Publications Act, Free Malaysia Today (https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2023/04/13/saifuddin-slammed-for-u-turn-on-printing-presses-and-publications-act/)
[3] [2018] 9 CLJ 496
About the Author
Sahain is a Legal Associate of XK Law. He graduated with Honours from the National University of Malaysia. Sahain believes that the legal fraternity plays an integral part in the operation of the rule of law in Malaysia and is keen to utilise his legal education towards the betterment of society and the country.
