Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984

A newspaper in Malaysia cannot be printed merely because its content is true or of interest to readers — it first requires a permit issued by the Minister of Home Affairs. That framework stems from the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, or Act 301, a law that has become one of the most hotly debated pillars of the country’s media landscape.

What does Act 301 regulate?

The Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 came into force on 1 September 1984 (P.U. (B) 364/1984). Its long title states that it is an act to regulate the use of printing presses and the printing, importation, production, reproduction, publication and distribution of publications.

The Act operates through a tiered system of authorisation. Section 3 requires a licence to operate a printing press; according to the statutory text, anyone who keeps for use or uses a printing press without a valid licence commits an offence and may, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or a fine not exceeding twenty thousand ringgit (RM20,000) or both. Section 5 makes it an offence to print or publish a newspaper without a permit, while section 6 empowers the Minister to issue permits for Malaysian newspapers or authorisation to import newspapers from Singapore.

The most frequently discussed power lies in section 7, which concerns undesirable publications. Under this provision, if the Minister is satisfied that any publication contains any matter which is prejudicial or likely to be prejudicial to public order, morality, security, relations with any foreign country or government, or which is prejudicial to public interest or national interest, the Minister may by order published in the Gazette prohibit that publication.

Provision	Matter regulated
Section 3	Licence to operate a printing press
Section 5	Offence of printing or publishing a newspaper without a permit
Section 6	Grant of newspaper permits by the Minister
Section 7	Power to prohibit undesirable publications
Section 13	Revocation and suspension of licences or permits

How can a permit or licence be suspended or revoked?

In addition to the power to approve or refuse applications, Act 301 grants the Minister the power to revoke or suspend licences and permits that have already been issued. This power is set out in section 13.

Throughout its history, this feature has been a focal point of debate because a publication’s permit can be halted without the publication being permanently banned. One frequently cited example is the suspension of the weekly newspaper The Heat’s permit in 2013, which the Malaysian Bar described as a case that raised questions about due process.

What changed after the 2012 amendment?

Act 301 has been amended several times, and the most significant amendment in current discourse is the Printing Presses and Publications (Amendment) Act 2012. According to the text of that amendment, the key changes include:

• References to “absolute discretion” relating to printing press licences (section 3) and newspaper permits (section 6) were removed from the text.
• Section 12 was amended so that a licence or permit “shall remain valid for so long as it is not revoked,” replacing the previous arrangement under which a licence or permit was valid for a period of twelve months and required periodic renewal.
• The phrase in section 13A which previously stated that the Minister’s decision “shall not be called in question by any court on any ground whatsoever” was deleted, opening the way to judicial review.
• Section 13B was amended to provide that a person shall be given an opportunity to be heard before a decision to revoke or suspend their licence or permit is made.

These amendments did not eliminate the requirement for licences and permits themselves; they changed how those powers may be exercised and challenged.

How is this power used in practice?

The power under section 7 has continued to be used in recent years. On 19 December 2024, the Ministry of Home Affairs issued a prohibition order under section 7(1) against six publication titles on grounds relating to morality. Among the titles listed in the Bernama report were:

• A Million Kisses In Your Lifetime by Monica Murphy
• Lose You To Find Me by Erik J. Brown
• Punai by Asyraf Bakti
• Scattered Showers by Rainbow Rowell
• When Everything Feels Like the Movies by Raziel Reid
• What If It’s Us by Becky Albertalli and Adam Silvera

According to the same report, the ministry stated that the purpose of the ban was control and prevention to avert potential threats or harm, and that anyone who contravenes the order may be liable to imprisonment for up to three years, a fine of up to RM20,000, or both.

What are the differing views on this Act?

Act 301 has long been the subject of conflicting views.

Those who support retaining or maintaining it argue that the government needs a tool to address content that could undermine public order, national security, religious and racial sensitivities, and morality — categories explicitly mentioned in section 7. Within this framework, the authorities’ discretion is seen as a mechanism for managing risk in a multiracial society.

Conversely, the Malaysian Bar has repeatedly called for the Act to be repealed. In a statement dated 28 December 2013, the Malaysian Bar described the Act as contrary to the right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution, and proposed an independent media council as a replacement. This position was reiterated in a statement dated 3 March 2025, which stressed that the Minister’s discretionary power under Act 301 is seen as conflicting with the goal of media self-regulation.

This debate is not merely academic. It is closely tied to broader media policy developments, including the establishment of a media council through legislation passed by Parliament in 2025.

What’s next

Malaysia’s media legal landscape is changing. The media council bill was passed by Parliament on 26 February 2025, creating a self-regulatory body for the media industry. Even so, as noted by the Malaysian Bar, the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984 remains in force alongside the new framework, and questions about the relationship between the two — including whether Act 301 should be repealed — are still being discussed.

For readers who want to explore this topic further, useful next steps include reading the full text of Act 301 and the 2012 amendment, following developments on the media council, and understanding the related provisions in the Federal Constitution. This article is descriptive and presents various positions factually; it is not legal advice.