Malaysiakini can appeal against appellate court decision in defamation lawsuit

PUTRAJAYA: Malaysiakini can proceed with its appeal at the Federal Court against an appellate court decision ordering the news portal to pay RM200,000 in damages to Raub Australian Gold Mine (RAGM) over the publication of defamatory articles.

A three-man bench comprising Justices Tan Sri Zainun Ali, Tan Sri Azahar Mohamed and Tan Sri Aziah Ali, in a unanimous decision yesterday, allowed Malaysiakini’s application for leave to appeal.

Zainun, who led the bench, said the news portal had satisfied Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 for its appeal to be heard at a later date.

She said the legal questions to be heard and determined by the Federal Court would focus on the defence of reportage and issue of damages.

Zainun requested the 14 questions of law, which were posed for the apex court’s determination, to be rephrased.

Among the legal questions were whether for the purpose of the Reynolds defence, a journalist was obliged to undertake an independent verification exercise although the subject matter was a matter of public concern and had been published extensively and continued to be published.

Another question was whether it was proper to award general damages for loss of goodwill and vindication of reputation to a plaintiff company that had independently been subjected to a voluntary winding-up by its creditors.

The Reynolds defence states that a defence can be raised, whereby a journalist has a duty to publish an allegation even if it turns out to be wrong.

In adjudicating on an attempted Reynolds defence, a court would investigate the conduct of the journalist and the content of the publication.

On Jan 11 this year, the Court of Appeal reversed a Kuala Lumpur High Court decision and ordered Malaysiakini and three other defendants, who were members of the editorial staff, to pay RM200,000 in damages and RM150,000 in legal costs.

The Court of Appeal had found that the three articles and two videos published in 2012 in relation to the gold mining activities of RAGM were unbalanced and one- sided as they did not carry responses from the Department of Environment, the Health Ministry and the Land and Mines Department.

On May 23, 2016, the High Court dismissed RAGM’s claim against Malaysiakini and the other three defendants.

Lawyers Datuk Dr Cyrus Das, James Khong and Syahredzan Johan represented Malaysiakini while RAGM was represented by counsel Tan Sri Cecil Abraham and Sunil Abraham. — Bernama