INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
Cyberbullying, Harm, and Behavioral Theory: A Socio-Legal  
Analysis in Malaysia  
Mazlifah Mansoor*  
Faculty of Law, University Technology MARA, Malaysia  
*Corresponding Author  
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.91100364  
Received: 13 November 2025; Accepted: 20 November 2025; Published: 11 December 2025  
ABSTRACT  
Cyberbullying refers to the intentional infliction of psychological or emotional harm through online  
communication. In Malaysia, legal responses have historically targeted improper use of digital platforms rather  
than the harmful conduct itself. The enactment of the Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2025 addresses this  
legislative gap by introducing specific offences dealing with online harassment and bullying that cause fear,  
alarm, or distress. This paper aims to evaluate whether the punitive sentencing approach introduced under the  
amended law is justified in addressing the nature and social impact of cyberbullying. It applies doctrinal legal  
analysis, supported by behavioral theories including symbolic interactionism, space transition theory, and  
social learning theory, to understand the motivation behind online aggression. A survey of 106 respondents  
further assesses public awareness of cyberbullying laws and perceptions of punishment. Preliminary findings  
reveal that cyberbullying often stems from misinterpretation and imitation of negative behavior. Notably,  
20.8% of respondents were unaware that indirect participation online can constitute abetment, and many  
struggled to distinguish harmful behaviour from unlawful conduct. In addition, an interview with educators,  
parents, and working adults reinforced survey findings by highlighting that anonymity, emotional  
impulsiveness, and social influence contribute to cyberbullying and that legal enforcement alone is insufficient.  
Although Malaysia’s legal reforms are timely and necessary, sentencing must be supplemented with broader  
measures. It is recommended that punitive enforcement be integrated with education, counselling, and  
restorative practices, to address the underlying behavioural and psychological factors shaping online  
misconduct.  
Keywords: Cyberbullying, Penal Code, Sentencing Theories, Malaysia, Social Theories  
.
INTRODUCTION  
Cyberbullying is a modern crime that can happen without personally knowing the victim or the victim knowing  
the aggressor (Mansoor, M. 2024). The hostility in the online platform can also occur without planning or due  
to peer imitation. On the other hand, cyberbullying can happen persistently in multiple forms and over a period  
of time. Victims often describe feelings of humiliation, anxiety, and isolation, while those who engage in  
harmful behaviour commonly do so behind a sense of distance or detachment created by digital platforms.  
Reports of young Malaysians experiencing severe emotional distress, and in some cases taking their own lives  
after sustained online harassment, underline the urgency of developing an effective and coherent response  
(Azriq, A., & Rokanatnam, T. (2021).  
Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 penalises improper use of online platforms  
addressing harmful online behaviour. Although widely applied, the provision has been criticised for its broad  
wording (Yusof et al., 2023).. For example, the act of flaming offensive content or exclusion from belonging to  
a particular online group amounts to improper use, and it fails to address the emotional and psychological  
dimensions of cyberbullying. Offences under the Minor Offences Act 1955 and the Penal Code also failed to  
capture the specific forms of harm associated with digital harassment. There was a public outcry for deterrent  
punishment due to the accused being fined in a case resulting in the victim taking her own life due to consistent  
cyberbullying. As a consequence, the Penal Code (Amendment) Act enacted offences of harassment, bullying,  
Page 4652  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
and doxxing with mens rea of causing emotional and psychological harm. This development marks an  
important acknowledgement that emotional injury, reputational damage, and psychological distress are real  
harms that deserve legal recognition. Anyone found guilty can be sentenced to between 1 year imprisonment to  
a maximum of 10 years when the person provoked a suicide attempt or suicide.  
However, punitive action alone cannot explain why cyberbullying occurs or what drives individuals to engage  
in such conduct. Much of the behaviour observed online arises from quick emotional reactions, misreading of  
messages, pressures within peer networks or a gradual loss of self-restraint in digital spaces. Theoretical  
perspectives explain the behaviour of the aggressor. Symbolic Interactionism explains that online interaction  
can easily be misunderstood due to the absence of tone, facial cues or shared context. Space Transition Theory  
suggests that people may behave online in ways that they would avoid offline because anonymity weakens  
social norms and reduces the fear of judgment. Social Learning Theory further illustrates how online  
behaviour, positive or harmful, can spread when users imitate what they see, especially when such conduct  
attracts attention or approval.  
These theoretical insights explain why cyberbullying cannot be addressed effectively through legal penalties  
alone. Sentencing theories such as retribution, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation each offer a lens  
for understanding the criminal justice response, but in practice, sentencing for cyberbullying varies based on  
the offender’s age, background, and the gravity of the behaviour. Rehabilitation is often limited to unstructured  
measures such as community service or police supervision, while opportunities for restorative approaches are  
rare. The resulting framework does not fully engage with the developmental, emotional, or social factors that  
contribute to online aggression.  
This paper, therefore, adopts a socio-legal approach that incorporates legal analysis, behavioural theory,  
empirical survey data from 106 respondents, and focus group discussions. The aim is to evaluate the  
effectiveness of the 2025 Penal Code amendments and to explore how Malaysians understand cyberbullying,  
its harm, and the appropriate means of addressing it. By viewing the issue through an integrated lens, the study  
seeks to identify whether legal reforms alone are sufficient or whether Malaysia requires a more holistic  
strategy that combines enforcement with education, digital ethics, and community-based interventions to  
reduce and prevent cyberbullying.  
I.  
LITERATURE REVIEW  
Cyberbullying with multifaceted forms of aggression has attracted scholarly discussion on the definition and  
forms of cyberbullying. Cyberbullying is often defined as intentional harm carried out through digital  
communication, often repeatedly and with the ability to reach victims beyond physical boundaries (Smith and  
Slonje, 2010). Similarly, Willard (2007) frames it as a form of online aggression that undermines a person’s  
dignity. The nature of cyberbullying, which differs from physical bullying, is in the form of anonymity and  
distance, as researched by Hinduja and Patchin (2010). They assert that aggressors can encourage individuals  
to act in ways they would usually restrain during direct interaction. Kowalski et al. (2014) further identify  
several forms of cyberbullying, such as harassment, exclusion, impersonation and outing, noting that harmful  
online behaviour evolves as communication platforms and user practices change.  
The lack of a legal framework addressing cyberbullying is consistently highlighted by scholars. Mansoor  
(2024) observes that the law lacked a clear definition of cyberbullying before the 2025 amendments, leaving  
enforcement agencies without a dedicated legal category to address online harassment. The reliance on general  
legislative provisions created uncertainty for law enforcement, as well as victims who were often unsure  
whether their experiences were legally recognised (Ahmad et al., 2020; Albar, 2021). When prosecuting  
offences under Section 233 of the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998, they frequently encountered  
problems in proving intention (Ismail, 2020). The term improper use by annoying is not easily proven. The law  
before the amendment also did not give sufficient weight to the emotional and psychological injury of the  
victims (Rahman, 2022).  
Comparative studies also provide useful reference points. Low and Gill (2022) describe Singapore as offering  
clearer protection through its Protection from Harassment Act 2014, which provides both criminal sanctions  
Page 4653  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
and civil remedies. Yusof et al. (2023) similarly argue that Malaysia must adopt a more consistent definition of  
cyberbullying to avoid overlapping interpretations and inconsistent enforcement outcomes.  
Beyond legal commentary, researchers have examined cyberbullying through behavioural and social theory.  
Saleh and Nurhadiyanto (2024) find that online hostility often emerges from reduced empathy and distortions  
of personal identity in digital environments. Jaishankar, through the Space Transition Theory (2019), explains  
that people may behave differently online because anonymity and invisibility weaken social norms and reduce  
the fear of consequences. Social Learning Theory adds another layer of explanation. Qing (2024) observes that  
harmful behaviour may be repeated when it receives attention, approval, or imitation, creating patterns of  
behaviour that spread quickly across online communities. Symbolic Interactionism also features strongly in the  
literature by showing that the meaning of messages in digital communication is shaped by individual  
interpretation. Without tone, expression or shared physical context, remarks intended as humour or casual  
criticism may be perceived as hostility, allowing conflicts to escalate quickly.  
METHODOLOGY  
The methodology of this paper is a mixed approach from a socio-legal perspective. The first is a doctrinal  
analysis of the Malaysian legal framework on cyberbullying, particularly the shift from Section 233 of the  
Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 to the new offences introduced through the Penal Code  
Amendment Act 2025. This review draws on statutory interpretation and existing academic commentary to  
assess how far the revised provisions meet current needs and whether they address earlier gaps in enforcement.  
The second examines behavioural and sentencing theories to understand the nature of cyberbullying as a social  
behaviour influenced by intention, peer influence, online interaction and the limits of punishment. Insights  
from theories such as Symbolic Interactionism, Space Transition Theory and Social Learning Theory inform  
the discussion on why individuals behave differently in digital environments and why punitive measures alone  
may be insufficient.  
Third is a descriptive survey that gathers information from 106 individuals of different ages, occupations and  
educational backgrounds. The survey measures their awareness of cyberbullying, their understanding of the  
law and their views on punishment for cyberbullying. The responses provide contextual insight that supports  
and strengthens the doctrinal and theoretical analysis.  
Fourth, semi-structured interviews were conducted with a small subset of participants from diverse  
demographic groups, including educators, parents, and working adults, to gain qualitative insights into  
behaviour motivations and awareness of legal provisions. These interviews were thematically analysed based  
on symbolic interactionism, space transition theory and social learning theory, enhancing the social legal  
interpretations of cyberbullying. Through this integration of legal, theoretical, and empirical perspectives, the  
study aims to produce a more complete understanding of how Malaysians perceive cyberbullying and how the  
2025 legal reforms operate in practice.  
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION  
Demographic Profile of Respondents  
A total of 106 individuals participated in the survey. The results are presented in several parts to show who the  
respondents are, how familiar they are with the law, and what kinds of responses they believe are most suitable  
for addressing cyberbullying. The narrative presentation below provides context for the patterns that appear in  
the data.  
Age  
The respondents represented a range of age groups, although young adults formed the largest portion of the  
sample. Table 1 shows that most participants were between 21 and 30 years old, which reflects the group that  
is generally most active on digital platforms and therefore more likely to encounter or observe cyberbullying.  
Page 4654  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
Table 1 presents the age distribution of respondents. A significant majority were between 21 and 30 years old  
(63.2 percent), followed by those aged 31–40 (19.8 percent). Only a small proportion were under 21 or above  
50.  
Table 1. Age Group Distribution  
Age Group Frequency Percentage  
Under 21  
21–30  
4
3.8%  
63.2%  
19.8%  
6.6%  
6.6%  
100%  
67  
21  
7
31–40  
41–50  
Above 50  
Total  
7
106  
Gender  
Table 2 shows that 59.4 percent of respondents were female, while 38.7 percent were male. A small number  
(1.9 percent) chose not to disclose their gender. The distribution is reasonably balanced and allows the data to  
reflect a range of perspectives.  
Table 2. Gender Distribution  
Gender  
Female  
Male  
Frequency Percentage  
63  
41  
59.4%  
38.7%  
1.9%  
Prefer not to say 2  
Total  
106  
100%  
Occupation  
Table 3 indicates that students were the largest group in the study, followed by law enforcement and  
government officers. This combination provides insight from both the general public and individuals with  
some exposure to enforcement processes.  
Table 3. Occupation  
Occupation  
Student  
Frequency Percentage  
69  
6
65.1%  
5.7%  
25.5%  
2.8%  
0.9%  
100%  
Educator/Lecturer  
Law enforcement/Government officer 27  
Private sector employee  
3
Other  
Total  
1
106  
Page 4655  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
Education Level  
According to Table 4, nearly half of the respondents held a bachelor’s degree, while others had completed  
diploma level, STPM or SPM qualifications. A smaller number had postgraduate degrees. Overall, the sample  
reflects a group with relatively high educational attainment, which may influence their awareness of legal  
issues.  
Table 4. Education Level  
Education Level  
Frequency Percentage  
SPM ( High School Cert) 16  
15.1%  
27.4%  
48.1%  
9.4%  
STPM/Diploma  
29  
51  
Bachelor’s Degree  
Master’s Degree or above 10  
Total 106  
100%  
Awareness of Cyberbullying Laws  
General Familiarity with the Penal Code Amendments  
Table 5 shows that while many respondents had heard of the Penal Code Amendment Act 2025, only a small  
number described themselves as very familiar with it. Most either understood the law only generally or were  
uncertain about the details. This suggests that public knowledge of the amendments remains limited.  
Table 5. Familiarity with Penal Code Amendments  
Level of Awareness Frequency Percentage  
Very familiar  
Somewhat familiar  
Heard but unsure  
Not familiar at all  
Total  
8
7.5%  
42  
49  
7
46.2%  
39.6%  
6.6%  
106  
100%  
Awareness of Specific Offences under Sections 507B to 507F  
Public understanding of the new cyberbullying offences was uneven. Table 6 shows that Section 507B was the  
most recognised, while Section 507C was the least familiar. A significant number of respondents did not  
recognise any of the sections at all. This supports earlier commentary that legal reform alone does not  
guarantee public understanding.  
Table 6. Awareness of Penal Code Sections 507B–507F  
Section  
507B  
507C  
507D  
507E  
Offence  
Frequency Percentage  
Threats, abuse or insults causing distress  
Indirect participation in online bullying  
54  
22  
50.9%  
20.8%  
29.2%  
30.2%  
Communications leading to harm or suicide 31  
Doxxing  
32  
Page 4656  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
507F  
Circulating false or harmful content  
37  
25  
34.9%  
23.6%  
None aware  
Preferred Approaches to Preventing Cyberbullying  
Prevention Priorities  
Table 7 reveals that more than half of the respondents believed that Malaysia should use a combination of  
punishment, education and rehabilitation. Only a small number supported a purely punitive, educational or  
awareness-based approach on its own. This indicates that the public views cyberbullying as a complex problem  
that requires several types of intervention.  
Table 7. Preferred Prevention Approach  
Approach  
Frequency Percentage  
Stronger penalties and enforcement 35  
33%  
Education and digital ethics  
Counselling/rehabilitation  
Public awareness campaigns  
Combined approach  
Total  
11  
2
10.4%  
1.9%  
1.9%  
52.8%  
100%  
2
56  
106  
Is Punishment Alone Sufficient  
As shown in Table 8, a large majority did not believe that punishment alone is enough to reduce cyberbullying.  
Only a small number agreed that punitive measures by themselves would be effective. The findings show  
strong support for complementary strategies, particularly those that address behaviour and understanding.  
Table 8. Perception of Punishment Adequacy  
Response Frequency Percentage  
Yes  
18  
85  
3
17%  
No  
80.2%  
2.8%  
100%  
Unsure  
Total  
106  
Rehabilitation and Behavioural Corrective Measures  
Preferred Rehabilitation Options  
Table 9 shows that restorative justice received the strongest support among respondents, followed by  
supervised community service, counselling and digital ethics education. These results suggest that the public  
prefers interventions that promote accountability, learning and behavioural change rather than punishment  
alone.  
Page 4657  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
Table 9. Preferred Rehabilitation Measures  
Rehabilitation Option  
Counselling or therapy  
Frequency Percentage  
53  
50%  
Digital ethics or empathy education 47  
44.3%  
67.9%  
52.8%  
1.8%  
Restorative justice  
72  
56  
2
Supervised community service  
Other comments  
Semi-structured interview  
The protocol consisted of five thematic sections: (i) understanding and awareness of cyberbullying, (ii)  
behavioural motivations, (iii) cultural and social perspectives, (iv) views on types of punishment for  
cyberbullying, and (v) preventive strategies. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis, with responses  
grouped under key behavioural theories, namely misinterpretation of online communication under symbolic  
interactionism, anonymity and online disinhibition under the space transition theory, and peer imitation and  
social influence under social learning theories. Themes were compared across demographic groups, namely  
educators, parents, and working adults, to identify patterns in perception and suggested interventions.  
Results of the Interview  
The participants were asked and encouraged to share personal observations, experiences and responses on the  
five thematic sections.  
Understanding and Awareness  
Interviews participants unanimously recognised cyberbullying as a serious form of harm despite the lack of  
physical interaction. Educators particularly emphasised its systemic occurrence among students, while parents  
expressed concern over its psychological impact and potential to trigger depression.  
Behaviour and Motivation  
Participants identified impulsive emotional reactions, misinterpretation of digital messages and peer influence  
as primary behavioural drivers. Anonymity and ease if digital access were also viewed as contributing factors  
that encourage aggressors to engage in harmful online conduct.  
Cultural and Societal Perspectives  
Some participants noted that Malaysian cultural values, particularly sensitivity to shame and public  
embarrassment, have intensified the impact of cyberbullying. The lack of open discussion within families and  
limited workplace intervention mechanisms were also seen as contributing factors to the psychological impact  
on the victims.  
Law and Punishment  
While participants acknowledged the importance of legal enforcement, most believed that punitive measures  
alone are insufficient. They stressed that deterrence is unlikely to be effective without concurrent efforts to  
educate and rehabilitate offenders.  
Recommendations and Future Strategies  
Page 4658  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
There was strong support for a combined intervention model integrating legal enforcement with digital ethics  
education, counselling and structure programmes and equipping families and institutions with clearer  
guidelines for early intervention.  
DISCUSSION  
Behavioural Motivation of Cyberbullying  
The findings indicate that cyberbullying often arises from emotional impulsiveness and reactive behaviour  
within digital environments. The survey results highlight that the majority of respondents aged 21-30 are  
frequent digital users and therefore more likely to experience rapid communication and peer influence. This  
observation is consistent with studies by Kowalski et al. (2014) and Hinduja and Patchin (2010). Interview  
responses from educators further confirm that online aggression has become systemic among students,  
sometimes continuing over time.  
Misinterpretation and Emotional Responses  
Interview participants acknowledged that cyberbullying frequently escalates due to misunderstanding. Digital  
messages lack facial expression and tone. Making humor susceptible to being misread as provocation. This  
supports the principles of Symbolic Interactionism, aligns with Saleh and Nurhadiyanto (2024), who explained  
that reduced relational cues weaken empathy online. Survey findings also showed strong support for non-  
punitive approaches, suggesting respondents recognise that emotional responses online require education rather  
than punishment alone.  
Anonymity and Online Disinhibition  
The absence of real-time accountability enables users to behave more aggressively online than they would  
offline. Multiple interview responses highlighted anonymity as a primary enable of negative expression. Space  
Transition Theory supports this view, suggesting that individuals shift behaviour when transiting between  
physical and cyber environments. The survey finding that only 20.8% understood how indirect participation  
contributes to cyberbullying reflects this behavioural disconnect  
Peer Reinforcement and Imitation  
Survey and interview responses show that online behaviour is often influenced by observation and imitation.  
Some participants observed that aggressive comments are sometimes replicated as part of defending an initial  
victim. Qing (2024) notes that online visibility can encourage repeat behaviour. This supports Social Learning  
Theory, as users may emulate what is commonly displayed in digital spaces without assessing its legal or  
ethical consequences.  
Legal Awareness and Sentencing Limitations  
Although the 2025 Penal Code Amendment provides a clear structure for prosecuting cyberbullying, awareness  
of these provisions remains limited. Both survey and interview results suggest that most users recognise the  
term cyberbullying but cannot identify precise legal boundaries. This aligns with Ahmad et al. (2020), who  
noted that legal reforms often fail to reach the public. Sentencing theory explains that punitive measures  
assume rational decision-making, whereas interview respondents indicated that cyberbullying frequently stems  
from emotional reactions. The preference for rehabilitation and educational interventions reflects this  
behavioural context.  
Recommendations for Integrated Strategies  
The combined analysis suggests that cyberbullying should be addressed through a multidisciplinary  
framework, as shown in Table 10 below.  
Table 10. Summary of Qualitative Themes, Findings, and Theory Alignment  
Page 4659  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
Themes: Key Findings, Interview Insights, Supporting Theory, and Implications  
Behavioural Motivation  
Key Findings: Impulsive, reactive behaviour  
Interview Insight: Educators observed systemic aggression  
Supporting Theory -  
Implications: Need emotional regulation and training  
Misinterpretation and emotional responses  
Key Findings: Messages misunderstood  
Interview Insight: Humour is mistaken for ridicule  
Supporting Theory: Symbolic Interactionism  
Implications: Improve digital empathy and understanding of different digital languages  
Anonymity and disinhibition  
Key Findings: Aggression due to anonymity  
Interview Insight: Multiple accounts used  
Supporting Theory: Space Transition Theory  
Implications: Highlight cyber accountability  
Peer Influence and Imitation  
Key Findings: Behaviour replicated via observation  
Interview Insight: Defence escalated into attacks  
Supporting Theory: Social learning theory  
Implications: Promoto positive role modelling  
Legal Awareness and Sentencing  
Key Findings: Low Awareness of the Law and Punishment  
Interview Insight: Heard of reform, unclear details  
Supporting Theory: Sentencing theory  
Implications: Combine punishment with education  
Strategic response  
Key Findings: Preference for an integrated model  
Interview Insight: Support restorative practices  
Supporting Theory: Theory of restorative justice  
Implications: Holistic reform required  
CONCLUSION  
The introduction of Sections 507B to 507F of the Penal Code is more than a legislative reform. It marks the  
final formal recognition in Malaysia of emotional and psychological harm due to online aggression. This paper  
demonstrates, however, that legal reform cannot transform digital behaviour. Awareness remains low, and  
cyberbullying often arises not necessarily from calculated wrongdoings. There is impulsive behavior,  
misinterpretation, and social reinforcement within digital environments.  
Page 4660  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
By integrating behavioural theory and empirical findings, this paper shifts the discourse from cyberbullying as  
a purely legal issue to one that reflects evolving patterns of human interaction in virtual spaces. The findings  
indicate that current punitive measures operate on the assumption of rational intent. On the other hand, actual  
online aggression is frequently emotionally driven and socially influenced. This suggests that future prevention  
strategies must prioritise behavioural guidance alongside legal deterrence.  
The evidence shows clear public support for an integrated approach that combines enforcement with structured  
education, counselling, and restorative practices. This aligns with contemporary sentencing theory, which  
acknowledges that sustainable change occurs when legal mechanisms are reinforced by personal accountability  
and value development.  
Ultimately, cyberbullying is not only a breach of law but a failure to adhere to digital ethics. Legal reform  
established the boundaries of unacceptable conduct, while education cultivates the conscience that sustains  
them. For Malaysia to respond effectively, policy must evolve from penalising harmful behaviour to  
proactively cultivating responsible online engagement.  
REFERENCES  
1. Ahmad, S. A., Noor, N. A. M., Munirah, A.,Isa@Yusuff, Y., Ibrahim, H., Ghazali, O., & Zulkifli,  
A. N. H. (2020). Cyberbullying: Analysis of laws in Malaysia. International Journal of Advanced  
Science and Technology, 29(8), 143–154.  
2. Albar, A. (2021). Cyberbullying in Malaysia: An overview of the legal framework and its  
adequacy. Journal of Cyber Law and Policy, 10(1), 45–60.  
3. Ismail, S. (2020). Legal challenges in addressing cyberbullying in Malaysia. Malaysian Law  
Journal, 8(2), 78–92.  
4. Low, W. L., & Gill, D. K. (2022). Malaysia’s approach towards cyberbullying: The existing  
framework.  
Journal  
of  
Legal,  
Ethical  
and  
Regulatory  
Issues,  
25(S2),  
1–14.  
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJLGC.730011  
5. Rahman, N. (2022). Reforming cyberbullying laws in Malaysia: A critical analysis. Asian Journal  
of Law and Policy, 17(3), 200–215.  
6. Yusof, N. S., Hashim, S. N., & Jamil, S. S. (2023). Cyberbullying: A systematic literature review  
on the definitional criteria. Journal of Cyber Psychology and Behavior. Advance online  
publication.  
7. Azriq, A., & Rokanatnam, T. (2021). Cyberbullying via social media: Case studies in Malaysia.  
OIC-CERT  
Journal  
on  
Cybersecurity,  
3(1),  
31–45.  
https://www.oic-  
cert.org/en/journal/pdf/3/1/313.pdf  
8. Mansoor, M. (2024). Enhancing legal responses to cyberbullying in Malaysia: Addressing gaps and  
proposing reforms (Extended abstract). E-Book of Extended Abstracts, 78.  
9. Mears, D. P., & Stafford, M. C. (2025). Gauging the totality of criminal legal sanctions and  
punishment: Implications for research and policy on retribution and deterrence. Punishment &  
Society. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/14624745251344576  
10. Saleh, S. N. A., & Nurhadiyanto, L. (2024). Identifikasi tindakan cyberbullying dalam aktivitas  
online role-playing berbasis media sosial. Jurnal Manajemen, Pendidikan, dan Ilmu Sosial, 5(3).  
https://doi.org/10.38035/jmpis.v5i3  
11. Qing, M. (2024). The mechanism and prevention strategies of adolescent cyberbullying: Based on  
the perspective of social learning theory. Advances in Psychology, 14(9), 343–350.  
https://doi.org/10.12677/ap.2024.149655  
12. Jaishankar, K. (2019). Cyber criminology and space transition theory: Contribution and impact. In  
International Centre for the Prevention of Crime (Ed.), 6th International Report on Crime  
Prevention and Community Safety: Preventing Cybercrime (pp. 101–110). International Centre for  
the Prevention of Crime. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5082409  
13. Kowalski, R. M., Giumetti, G. W., Schroeder, A. N., & Lattanner, M. R. (2014). Bullying in the  
digital age: A critical review and meta-analysis of cyberbullying research among youth.  
Psychological Bulletin, 140(4), 1073–1137. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035618  
Page 4661  
www.rsisinternational.org  
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND INNOVATION IN SOCIAL SCIENCE (IJRISS)  
ISSN No. 2454-6186 | DOI: 10.47772/IJRISS | Volume IX Issue XI November2025  
14. Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2010). Cyberbullying prevention and response: Expert perspectives.  
Routledge.  
15. Tokunaga, R. S. (2010). Following you home from school: A critical review and synthesis of  
research on cyberbullying victimization. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(3), 277–287.  
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.11.014  
Page 4662  
www.rsisinternational.org