Blogger protection - using the law as a shield

Just thought I'd share some legal pointers in case blogging gets the big stick from the new Minister.
The law book that is thrown is the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 (besides being sued for tarnishing people's reputation without good cause/evidence/facts/comment).
Two sections that bloggers should be aware are s211 and s233.
Now for the prosecution to prove a criminal offence they must satisfy the court beyond reasonable doubt, that means that the defence need only show reasonable doubt and the case is won.
Second, any offence has two elements that must be satisfied - the act of the wrong-doing and the mental element - I intended to kill him (as e.g.).

So if you read s211 carefully the prosecution must prove the following:
a) That the accused is an "other person using a content applications service". So using a free blog application (e.g. Blogger) may not be using a content applications service; but may be using an applications service. Subtle but critical difference.
b) that the content provided is indecent, obscene, false, menacing, or offensive in character;
This means that the nature of the content has to be assessed. problem is that there is no one size/standard. So what is obscene to me may not be obscene to you. So-how? Law will in such circumstances apply a subjective test. Did the accused consider the content obscene etc.
c) the content provided was "with intent to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person".
This is the kicker. For the prosecution to succeed, they must show that the person posting the content had the intention to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass any person. If the intention is to post but not to annoy then this element of the offence has not been proven.
So bloggers, all you need say is that the posting below is not intended by you to harass, abuse or threaten any person.

S233 is similar; except that if you use Blogger etc you can be caught by s233, since you are using an applications service to make, create or solicit any comment etc.
Now s233 also requires that the prosecution prove that the comment is obscene, false etc, and was made by the blogger with the intention to annoy etc. So (like s211) if there is no intent to annoy, by the maker then there is no offence.

So to show intent to annoy they must show that:-
(i) blog is read by that person which is known by the blogger (otherwise how to annoy, coz its like writing a diary about something and no one knows about it). A person cannot get annoyed if he does not know what is written about him.
(ii) the blogger knew this - which means ask the blogger this question "Did you know that the person reads your blog?" Answer: No
end question.
(iii)the purpose of writing this is to annoy etc that person (say a politician). If the purpose is something else than they cannot succeed.

So two things that bloggers should do based on the rights provided by the Law:
(i) Always state that the content expressed is not intended to annoy, abuse, threaten or harass another person;
(2) State that the content is an expression of your frustration with the MSM in only publishing BN's point of view and not contrarian views.

Many a time people are ignorant of the law and think that they the authorities are always right. Remember that they are human beings too, and dont know enough of the law to be sure. As human beings they can make mistakes too.
So fellow bloggers this way we can use the Law against the BN itself.