Curtailing Free Expression, Opinion and Information Online in Southeast Asia iv. Lack of independent oversight mechanisms The fact that – and ease with which – State authorities have systematically misused laws in the region highlights the fourth commonality. These laws do not provide for independent oversight mechanisms to safeguard against their misuse. In the Indonesian case of Anindya Joediono, the investigation of her alleged criminal defamation under the UU ITE was conducted by the police, even though the alleged defamatory comment had accused police officers of sexual assault. In Thailand, military courts have been used to conduct the trials of civilians, violating their most basic rights to fair trial, let alone providing them with recourse to review by an independent mechanism. (It is hoped that a recent order by the Prime Minister will now phase out this practice.) In Singapore, the Administration of Justice (Protection) Act dictates to independent judicial bodies the criminal extent of the offence of contempt of court, despite judicial pronouncements under common law which have neither reflected nor called for the severity of penalties proposed under the Act. In Malaysia and the Philippines, the Communications and Multimedia Act and the Cybercrime Prevention Act did not empower independent mechanisms with mandates to impartially review decisions of the MCMC and the DOJ where they were in violation of fundamental rights and freedoms, as was the case with Sarawak Report, Medium, The Malaysian Insider, Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos Jr. Meanwhile, within the laws of Laos and Vietnam, executive, legislative and judicial powers are so explicitly intertwined and controlled by the Lao Peoples’ Revolutionary Party and the Communist Party of Vietnam that an independent oversight mechanism is near impossible. Independent oversight mechanisms would be best placed to determine cases of complaints filed by individuals or legal persons against individual representatives of the State or government authorities that breach the same laws. Currently, most of the laws covered in this paper do not even include legal provisions allowing for complaints to be filed by defendants against State representatives or bodies. In most of the cases, charges were mounted against individuals and legal persons by prosecutors, police, the military or other authorities linked to the State and also business enterprises, while targeted individuals had no judicial, administrative or other avenue to seek independent assessment of their claims of defence. 149