In defamation cases, a plaintiff must prove that statements refer to them, are defamatory, and published. Defenses like fair comment require precise pleading and justification can fully absolve liability if proven.

JUDGMENT

Mohd Firuz Jaffril J:

Brief Facts

[1] The Plaintiff is, the publisher for the Tamil Malar, a Tamil language daily, commenced this proceeding for defamation against the Defendant, who is the member of Parliament for Tapah and also the Chairman of the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC) for the state of Federal Territory for statements made by the Defendant in three (3) separate forums

[2] In defending the Plaintiff's claim, the defendant denied that the statements made by him were defamatory of the Plaintiff. The Defendant further relies on the defence of fair comment and justification. In addition, the Defendant also commenced a counterclaim for defamation against the Plaintiff for two articles published in Tamil Malar on 3 September 2017 and 5 September 2017.

Principles Applicable In An Action For Defamation

[3] In order to succeed in a defamation suit, a plaintiff must establish the presence of three (3) main ingredients listed below failing which, the action ought to be dismissed. The principles are:

(i) The alleged words directly refer to Plaintiff;

(ii) Those words are defamatory of the Plaintiff; and

(iii) The words complained of were published to third parties.

(see Dr R Kunasegaran v. Dr Chiam Yaw Yung and Ayob Saud v. Tun Sambanthamurthi, [1989] 1 MLJ 315)

[4] Applying the above principles to the case at hand, this Court has to determine the following issues:

(i) Whether the statements stated in the articles and/or interview refers to the Plaintiff?

(ii) Whether there was publication?

(iii) Whether the words in the articles are capable of a defamatory meaning?

[5] The following is the Court's analysis on the three (3) statements made by the Defendant.

The 1st Alleged Defamatory Statement

[6] On 5 September 2017, the electronic new portal "Malaysia Kini" published the following article:

"... Daily's boss, legal advisor 'assaulted', Deputy Minister claims 'no such thing'..."

[7] The above article carried the following statements purportedly made by the Defendant:

(i) "In the last 2 two days, Tami Malar has been publishing fake news about Federal Territory MIC'; and

(ii) "Today some MIC Youth boys wanted to clarify the issue (with the newspaper").

[8] At para 8 of the SOC, the Plaintiff avers that the above impugned article are defamatory and/or libelious of the Plaintiff, in the natural and ordinary meaning that:

a. "Plaintif menerbitkan berita palsu;

b. Plaintif menerbitkan berita palsu mengenai MIC Wilayah Persekutuan;

c. Plaintif telah menerbitkan berita palsu mengenai MIC Wilayah Persekutan secara bersiri;

d. Plaintif telah menerbitkan berita palsu mengenai MIC Wilayah Persekutan tanpa menghiraukan kebenarannya;

e. Menyalahgunakan hak kebebasan akhbar;

f. Plaintiff menerbitkan berita atau meyiarkan maklumat kepada umum tanpa terlebih dahulu disaring atau diperiksa kebenarannya;

g. Plaintiff tidak jujur dalam penerbitannya. "

The 2nd Alleged Defamatory Statement

[9] On 5 September 2017, the Makkal Osai Tamil daily published an article with the following heading:

"Saya langsung tiada kaitan"

[10] The above article carried the following statements purportedly made by the Defendant:

(i) "Kejadian yang berlaku semalam tidak berlaku di pejabat suratkhabar berkenaan. la berlaku di tingkat bawah sahaja"; and

(ii) "Berita palsu mengenai MIC Wilayah telah dikeluarkan dua hari berturut-turut'.

[11] At para 12 of the Statement of Claim, the Plaintiff alleges that the alleged defamatory statement by the Defendant carried the same imputation as stated in para 8 of the Statement of Claim.

The 3rd Alleged Defamatory Statement

[12] On 8 September 2017, whilst being interviewed live on a Facebook program "1tamilanz sangam", the Defendant was alleged to have made the following statements:

"Iaitu di tempat itu mereka dari MIC beberapa pemuda-pemuda dari MIC Wilayah Persekutuan bahagian MIC... penjelasannya ialah... untuk dua hari berturut-turut dalam akhbar tersebut maklumat yang tidak benar keluar berterusan. Mengenai parti..dan mengenai negeri'.

[13] At para 16 of t