KUALA LUMPUR – Many are asking why the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) is investigating influencer Aliff Ahmad after he posted about wanting to “scrut” Nurul Izzah Anwar. Some say it’s the people’s right to question leaders. That’s fair. But we need to understand there’s a difference between asking a question and insinuating something unproven — especially when done publicly and en masse.
Nurul Izzah’s issue is NOT a 3R case
MCMC is not investigating Aliff under the 3R category (race, religion, royalty) for this Nurul Izzah matter. While there are ongoing 3R investigations involving other cases, this is not one of them. Don't confuse the two.
What’s the issue with the post?
Aliff posted that if his post reached 20,000 shares, he would expose where Nurul Izzah got her money from, what business she runs, and so on.
This could be seen as a subtle form of coercion: “If enough people share this, I’ll air her secrets.”
Isn’t Nurul Izzah a public figure? Shouldn’t she be questioned?
Yes — but there’s a way to do it respectfully.
If you have evidence, lodge a report.
But taking it to social media without proof, using provocative language — that crosses into harassment or an attempt to damage someone’s reputation.
If there’s wrongdoing, let agencies like the MACC investigate.
Calling on the public to share a post just to increase pressure — that’s not an investigation, that’s public shaming.
Why is MCMC using Section 233?
Because this law prohibits using the internet to harass, humiliate, threaten, or spread offensive content.
The post may contain elements of “harassment” or “offensiveness” if it appears to be an attempt to smear someone without a strong factual basis.
But didn’t Aliff make a statutory declaration (SD) and take responsibility? Isn’t that enough?
No. A statutory declaration is merely a statement — not full evidence.
Authorities still need to seek supporting proof — such as messages, sources, and full context.
Just like in any other case, a confession alone isn’t enough. The police still need to investigate before any charges are brought.
This isn’t about politics. It’s about accountability.
We all have the right to speak. But that right comes with responsibility.
If your form of expression harms others without evidence, or is only meant to stir engagement, then the authorities do have grounds to investigate.
MCMC can’t wait until things spiral out of control before taking action.
In summary:
– The Nurul Izzah post is not a 3R issue.
– MCMC is investigating due to the tone and style of the post possibly breaching Section 233.
– A statutory declaration isn’t a free pass — investigations will proceed.
– You can ask questions — just do it properly.
– Criticism is fine — but don’t provoke for the sake of content.
Do not misuse freedom of speech to attack others at will.
The writer, Muhammad Aidil Akmal Sharidan, is a lawyer. This commentary reflects his personal view from a legal standpoint.
The post Why is Aliff Ahmad being probed by MCMC over Nurul Izzah? Here’s a simple explanation – Aidil Akmal appeared first on Scoop.