AI without accountability? Why Malaysia needs new law now — Hafidz Hakimi Haron
MAY 13 — There is no denying that the world is currently witnessing an unprecedented surge in the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) over the past few years. The rapid advancement of AI technology has brought about a significant revolution across various aspects of human life, including education, finance, security, healthcare, transportation, politics, and even government administration. Once considered an abstract and futuristic concept, AI has now become an integral part of daily life, directly impacting society and individuals at large.
While the swift development of AI, driven by increasing reliance on this technology has offered tremendous benefits, it has also given rise to a multitude of risks. These include unintentional discrimination, algorithmic opacity, breaches of privacy and fundamental rights, and, most concerning of all, the ambiguity surrounding legal liability when decisions are made by machines without active human involvement. Such issues underscore the urgent need to formulate a dedicated legal framework to regulate and ensure accountability in the use of AI in Malaysia.
Legal issues triggered by AI
From the author’s perspective, one of the central legal concerns posed by AI is the issue of accountability regarding AI-generated content and actions. The ambiguity surrounding legal liability has, to some extent, contributed to the misuse of generative AI technology. For instance, in December 2024, the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) revealed a significant increase in AI-generated pornographic content taken down in 2024, with 1,225 instances compared to just 186 in 2022. More recently, the controversy over the use of AI-generated Malaysian flags further highlights the need for legislation that clearly defines liability for AI-generated creations.
Such legislation must address critical questions: Who should be held responsible if an AI system causes harm, or injury, or, in a broader context, violates human rights? These questions are more easily addressed within the conventional legal system, where liability is assigned to human actors. However, the challenge lies in the fact that AI systems can operate autonomously, blurring the lines of legal liability, particularly in terms of intent and identifying the true actor behind a wrongful or negligent act.
Another legitimate concern is data privacy and personal data protection. AI systems heavily depend on large-scale data, including sensitive and personal information. This raises the risks of digital surveillance, data misuse, and leaks. Moreover, overreliance on AI can lead to discrimination and bias; intentional or otherwise, undermining social justice and violating the principle of equality before the law. AI can also be manipulated to produce false content that threatens not only personal reputations but also public interest, such as the spread of hate speech or propaganda that could destabilize democratic processes. Without proper legal safeguards, AI could become a powerful tool for large-scale disinformation.
Additionally, generative AI presents challenges to intellectual property (IP) and copyright protection. Its ability to produce songs, write books, or create other original works raises dilemmas about authorship and ownership of AI-generated content.
The writer says new laws must address a slew of critical questions: Who should be held responsible if an AI system causes harm, or injury, or, in a broader context, violates human rights? — AFP pic
International AI legislations and Malaysia’s regulatory gaps
Globally, the increasing use of AI has prompted a variety of legal and ethical initiatives. Many countries and intergovernmental bodies have taken proactive steps to develop policies and legal frameworks to ensure that AI is used safely, ethically, and responsibly. However, Malaysia is still in the early stages of developing such laws.
Initial steps can be seen in the formulation of the National Guidelines on AI Governance and Ethics released by the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI) in September 2024. Additionally, the establishment of the Malaysia National AI Office (NAIO) in December 2024 marks a positive move toward building a robust digital ecosystem in Malaysia. NAIO’s creation is essential to address and close regulatory gaps promptly.
For instance, the Personal Data Protection Act 2010 is currently inadequate in dealing with challenges posed by AI, particularly in matters involving automated profiling, biometric data processing, and autonomous decision-making. Likewise, existing tort law in Malaysia remains untested in handling claims of negligence involving AI systems in fields like automotive technology, healthcare, or finance. This signals a pressing need to review and adapt global best practices to fill existing gaps in Malaysia’s legal framework.
In contrast, some countries and regions have made more advanced strides. The European Union (EU), for instance, enforced the world’s first Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act on 1 August 2024. This law categorizes AI risks into four levels: minimal, limited, high-risk, and unacceptable. Other advanced nations such as Singapore, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Japan are also actively developing AI-related legislation and guidelines.
AI technology holds immense potential for societal benefit, but it also presents serious risks if not managed responsibly. Even prominent technologists and scientists, such as Alan Turing, Sam Altman, and Elon Musk have voiced concerns about AI’s potential to surpass human intelligence and pose existential threats.
In Malaysia, the lack of a dedicated legal framework for AI raises concerns about accountability, user rights, and safety. Therefore, a comprehensive national law must be enacted, one that is guided by principles of justice, transparency, and local values to ensure that AI is used ethically, safely, and for the benefit of all.
*The author is an Associate Fellow at the Legal and Justice Research Centre, School of Law, Universiti Utara Malaysia
** This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.
