Joint Open Letter | Urging the Establishment of an Independent Information Commission

/in , /by

I. Introduction

We, the undersigned civil society organisations (CSOs) and individuals, urge the government to speed up the tabling of the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill and to establish an independent Information Commission as the oversight body.

On 14 November, Datuk Zamri Misman, Director General of the Legal Affairs Division in the Prime Minister’s Department of Malaysia, announced that the government will table the Ombudsman Malaysia Bill and the Freedom of Information (FOI) Bill in 2026 rather than during the current Parliamentary session, citing the need for further engagement. While consultation is welcome, we are deeply concerned by the recent parliamentary response from the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform), Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman Said.

The Minister stated that the Ombudsman is intended to address weaknesses in complaint management and whistleblower protection systems. However, by consolidating the functions of the Public Complaints Bureau (BPA) and the Enforcement Agency Integrity Commission (EAIC) under a single Ombudsman, the FOI mandate risks being relegated to a secondary or marginalised role. This would severely undermine the transformative potential of FOI as a standalone right and a core pillar of democratic governance.

We therefore strongly caution against subsuming the FOI oversight function under the Ombudsman structure.

II. Need for an Independent Information Commission

We reaffirm our position that oversight of the right to information must be housed in a dedicated, independent Information Commission rather than placed under the Ombudsman. This position is grounded in the following key considerations:

1. Case Volume & Timeliness

International experience demonstrates that FOI oversight requires significant time and focused institutional attention. As emphasised by Prof. John McMillan, Australia’s inaugural Information Commissioner, during the RTI Roundtable organised by the Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ) on 20 June 2025, even well-functioning Ombudsmen face significant challenges when FOI responsibilities are added to their already extensive caseloads. In both South Australia and Tasmania, FOI matters consumed a disproportionate share of Ombudsman resources, inevitably diverting attention from their other core mandates.

FOI must not be treated as an administrative afterthought. Malaysia needs a body that can respond swiftly and consistently, especially given the country’s historically opaque information ecosystem.

2. Enforcement Powers

Effective FOI regimes depend on an independent commission grounded in human rights principles, with enforceable oversight. An Information Commission must have:

  • Power to compel disclosure of information
  • Authority to issue binding orders and impose sanctions for non-compliance

Traditionally, Ombudsmen only issue non-binding recommendations, which public agencies may ignore with few consequences. Although the exercise of such soft power might be useful in encouraging broader policy changes, it may not be as effective in compelling disclosure of information. Embedding FOI under a body without enforcement power risks producing a weak, symbolic system rather than one capable of meaningfully shifting government culture toward transparency.

3. To ensure independence and prevent political interference

FOI oversight must be structurally independent from the Executive to avoid political interference. The Commission should be directly accountable to Parliament, not to the government of the day. A body nested under the Ombudsman, whose mandate is already tied to executive-facing complaints systems, lacks the necessary autonomy to adjudicate politically sensitive requests, including those involving influential ministries or agencies.

4. Technical Expertise

FOI decisions require specialised skills in balancing:

  • National security considerations
  • Privacy and data protection
  • Public interest tests
  • Classification and declassification standards

A dedicated Information Commission would be able to recruit, train, and retain officers with the niche competencies required to safeguard the right to information. Such expertise is absent within a generalist Ombudsman institution.

III. Proposed Structure of the Information Commission

1.  Composition and Appointment

We propose a Commission comprising up to seven members, including a Chair and Deputy Chair with gender balance and proven experience in information governance, human rights, law, or public administration. Appointments must follow a transparent, merit-based process involving proper consultation. Commissioners should serve fixed five-year terms with stringent disqualification and conflict-of-interest rules.

2. Functions and Powers

To ensure the Commission is effective:

  • Its decisions must be binding with the force of High Court orders, subject only to judicial review.
  • It must have clear powers to enforce disclosure, issue penalties, and direct reforms within public bodies.
  • Oversight by the Parliamentary Special Select Committee on Human Rights, Election and Institutional Reform should apply to appointments, removals, reporting, and compliance.

3. Reporting Line

The Commission must report directly to Parliament, not to the Executive. Its annual reports should evaluate agency compliance, identify systemic barriers, and recommend policy reforms.

4. Budget

The Commission must receive a dedicated allocation from the annual federal budget through the Ministry of Finance to ensure operational stability and independence.

IV. Way Forward

In an era of escalating misinformation and disinformation, the public’s ability to access accurate, timely and complete government-held information is indispensable. Although Selangor and Penang have enacted state FOI laws, these frameworks remain limited, particularly due to the overarching reach of the Official Secrets Act (OSA) 1972 and inconsistent implementation.

A standalone FOI Bill, paired with a fully independent Information Commission, is critical to ensuring robust oversight, enforcement, and public trust. The Commission must oversee:

  • Implementation of the FOI law
  • Appeals and dispute resolution
  • Monitoring and enforcement
  • Institutional training
  • Public engagement and awareness
  • Standardised, fair fee structures

This model is both workable and progressive, and it aligns with global best practices. Given Malaysia’s increasingly restrictive information landscape, delays are unacceptable.

We therefore call on the Government of Malaysia to: Commit to a clear and public timeline for tabling the FOI Bill and establishing an independent Information Commission, specifically to ensure it remains separate from the Ombudsman Bill.

The multi-stakeholder Protem Committee tasked with drafting the FOI Bill can guide the inclusion of the Commission’s formation within the FOI Bill.

This letter is undersigned on 3 December 2025 by:

Organisations

  1. Centre for Independent Journalism (CIJ)
  2. ARTICLE 19
  3. Sinar Project
  4. The Center to Combat Corruption and Cronyism (C4 Center)
  5. Agora Society Malaysia
  6. Aliran
  7. Architects of Diversity (AOD)
  8. Beyond Borders
  9. Borneo Speaks
  10. Building Initiatives in Indigenous Heritage (BIIH)
  11. Coalition for Clean and Fair Elections (BERSIH)
  12. Federation of Alumni Associations of Taiwan Universities, Malaysia (FAATUM)
  13. Freedom Film Network
  14. Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia (GBM)
  15. Gerakan Media Merdeka (GERAMM)
  16. Kemban Kolektif
  17. KL and Selangor Chinese Assembly Hall (KLSCAH) Youth
  18. KLRA+SD (Persatuan Kebajikan Kelestarian Komuniti Kuala Lumpur /Kuala Lumpur Residents Action for Sustainable Development Association)
  19. KLSCAH civil right committee
  20. Lawyer Kamek
  21. Malaysiakini
  22. MARTABAT UNTUK SEMUA PETALING JAYA
  23. North South Initiative
  24. Persatuan Kesedaran Komuniti Selangor (EMPOWER)
  25. Persatuan Pemangkin Daya Masyarakat (ROSE)
  26. Persatuan Petaling Jaya Lestari
  27. PJ Sejahtera
  28. PSM
  29. PUSAT KOMAS
  30. Reproductive Rights Advocacy Alliance Malaysia (RRAAM)
  31. Sabah Youth Movement (SYM)
  32. SAVE Rivers
  33. SIS Forum
  34. SIUMAN Collective
  35. Suara Rakyat Malaysia (SUARAM)
  36. Tenaganita
  37. Teoh Beng Hock Association for Democratic Advancement (TBH-ADA)
  38. Treat Every Environment Special (TrEES)
  39. University of Malaya Association of New Youth
  40. ⁠Women’s Aid Organisation

Individuals

  1. Andrew Khoo
  2. Beatrice Leong, gender-disability activist, independent documentary filmmaker
  3. Dr Chang Teck Peng, Associate Professor, Tunku Abdul Rahman University of Management and Technology (TAR UMT) (Individual)
  4. Dr. Chong Wu Ling, Senior Lecturer, Universiti Malaya
  5. Dr. Gayathry Venkiteswaran, Assistant Professor, University of Nottingham Malaysia
  6. Dr. Khoo Ying Hooi, Associate Professor, Universiti Malaya
  7. Dr. Mahyuddin Ahmad, Lecturer, Universiti Sains Malaysia
  8. Dr G Manimaran, Media Consultant
  9. ⁠Fatimah Merican
  10. Honey Tan
  11. Jernell Tan, Activist
  12. Mahi Ramakrishnan
  13. Maria Chin Abdullah
  14. Marina Mahathir
  15. Norman Goh, journalist
  16. Parimala A/P Nesamany, Chairperson, Residents Association of Section 22 Petaling Jaya
  17. Rashidah Shuib, Professor Emerita, Universiti Sains Malaysia
  18. S.S. Yoga, Freelance journalist/editor
  19. Voon Zhen Yi
  20. Yuwana Podin, social activist
  21. Zaharom Nain, Adjunct Professor, University Malaya (Individual)
  22. Zainah Anwar

 

READ THE FULL OPEN LETTER HERE