The court ruled that the impugned statements in the Press Release did not constitute defamation as they reflected existing public sentiments and did not materially harm the Plaintiffs' reputations.

Roz Mawar Rozain J:

[1] This Court is called upon to determine a claim which has attracted public interest by reason of the identities of the parties and the issues it raises concerning the professional conduct of advocates and solicitors in the administration of justice. The Plaintiffs, senior legal practitioners, contended that a Press Release issued on 19 August 2022 by the Malaysian Bar and its then President has defamed them, falsely imputing professional misconduct in connection with high-profile criminal appeal proceedings before the Federal Court.

[2] The Plaintiffs further claimed that the Defendants specifically intended and/or tacitly authorised the media organisations to publish or republish and disseminate the words contained in the Press Release.

[3] It was also contended that the Defendants maliciously and wrongfully conspired and combined amongst themselves to defame and injure the Plaintiffs in the way of their professional capacities as advocates and solicitors having conduct of the criminal appeal proceedings at the Federal Court.

[4] The Plaintiffs alleged that the Defendants, by having issued and disseminated the Press Release, had decided and condemned them for professional misconduct in the criminal appeal proceedings at the Federal Court and thus were in breach of their statutory duty under s 99 of the Legal Profession Act 1976 ( LPA ).

[5] Given the serious nature of the allegationsâ€"touching upon the Plaintiffs' professional reputation and the perceived integrity of the justice systemâ€"this Court sets to approach the evidence with care and decide the issues strictly in accordance with established legal principles. Public scrutiny cannot replace the rule of law, and media speculation has no place in judicial deliberation.

Defamation

[6] The task before the Court is to first evaluate whether the Plaintiffs have on a balance of probabilities, established the essential elements of the tort of defamation, namely that the impugned statements are defamatory, that they refer to the Plaintiffs, and that they were published to third parties. The Court must also consider whether any of the recognised defences to defamation - justification, fair comment, or qualified privilege - have been successfully made out by the Defendant should liability be established.

[7] It is in this context that the Court now turns to examine the pleadings, the evidence adduced, and the submissions of the parties.

The Pleaded Case

[8] The Plaintiffs' claim is premised on a Press Release published on 19 August 2022 by the 2nd Defendant, then President of the 1st Defendant (the Malaysian Bar) on the latter's website. The Press Release was titled:

"Abuse of Process Brings Disrepute to Our Justice System".

[9] The Plaintiffs pleaded that two specific paragraphs of the Press Release, in their natural and ordinary meaning, defamed them. These are paragraphs [2] and [6] of the Press Release. The relevant impugned portions of the Press Release pleaded to be defamatory are as follows:

Paragraph [2]:

"The nation is witnessing our justice system being abused and brought to disrepute through the frantic acts and numerous attempts to postpone the hearing of the case, application to discharge from acting for the former Prime Minister, defiance by refusing to proceed with submissions on the appeal after the Federal Court had made its ruling, and the sudden discharge ofZaid Ibrahim, Liew Teck Huat and Rueben Mathiavaranam, by Dato' Sri Najib Razak."

Paragraph [6]:

"The various attempts to undermine the justice system through such unscrupulous strategies are a perversion of our justice system and an abuse of the Court process. The advocates and solicitors involved in such acts have conducted themselves unprofessionally and would have to face disciplinary action."

[10] The Plaintiffs pleaded that the above statements bear the following defamatory imputations (Amended Statement of Claim (SoC), para 12):

(a) That the Plaintiffs deliberately acted unprofession