It was recently reported that the new MyKad contains 53 features, compared with 23 in the previous version.

LATELY, many Malaysians have grown uneasy about how the MyKad system is being used.

This concern is not really about technology itself but about trust – or the lack of it – between ordinary citizens and the institutions entrusted to safeguard their personal information.

It was recently reported that the new MyKad contains 53 features, compared with 23 in the previous version.

Privacy and surveillance are serious concerns but conversations on these issues should not be driven by fear, rumours or raw emotion as that can lead society down a dangerous path. Technology itself is not the problem; what matters is who controls it and how it is used.

Many Malaysians are worried that using MyKad for everything – from transactions to identity verification and other services – could create a culture of constant surveillance. Such concerns are not unfounded, given the major data breaches involving government and private sector systems in recent years.

It is only fair to demand stronger data protection laws, greater transparency and accountability from those handling our personal information. At the same time, not every digital initiative should be viewed as a conspiracy aimed at “total control”. While such claims may be emotionally compelling, they can also fuel unnecessary panic, deepen public distrust and erode confidence in our institutions.

The issue here is not the MyKad but trust. Ironically, many of us already hand over vast amounts of personal data every day to foreign tech companies through our smartphones, e-wallets, online shopping platforms and social media. They track what we buy, where we go, what we like and how we behave – often far more extensively than most government systems ever do. Yet, many of us are more fearful of our own local authorities than of these global tech giants. This reflects a deeper breakdown in public trust.

A country cannot function effectively if citizens begin to suspect every move the government makes. At the same time, the government cannot afford to ignore genuine public concerns. The government carries a heavy responsibility. Simply telling people not to worry is not enough; what is needed is real action.

Firstly, there must be transparency. The public should be clearly informed about what data is being collected, who has access to it, how long it will be retained and what safeguards exist against misuse. Silence or vague responses only deepen suspicion and erode public confidence.

Secondly, there must be stronger and more independent data protection mechanisms. Data leaks should not be treated as minor mistakes; they require accountability. Clear consequences must be imposed for negligence, corruption or the misuse of personal information. Trust cannot be rebuilt if failures are met without action.

Thirdly, Parliament should establish an independent body to oversee national digital ID systems and cybersecurity. Such oversight is not a threat, rather, it is a safeguard that strengthens accountability and helps build public trust.

As citizens, we also have a role to play. Many of us overshare online without thinking. Being a mature digital citizen means not only being alert but also being rational.

The real danger is not just surveillance but also the risk of becoming a fearful, divided society where suspicion replaces reason. When fear dominates our conversations, we become easy targets for misinformation, manipulation and political extremism.

Democracies do not only fail under dictators; they can also erode through persistent distrust and fragmentation within society.

We need balance: the right to question policies and demand accountability must be preserved. The government, in turn, must accept scrutiny with humility and transparency while public debate should remain grounded in facts and fairness, not emotional alarmism.

A stable, progressive nation requires more than new technology; it demands ethics, respect for the Constitution and mutual trust between the people and those who govern. Technology without ethics can become oppressive, just as fear without wisdom can be destructive.

Malaysia must not drift into either unchecked control or unchecked paranoia. The way forward lies in accountable leadership, informed citizens, stronger institutions and a renewed culture of trust. Only then can digital progress move in step with dignity, freedom and unity.

K.T. Maran

Seremban

 The Sun Malaysia