The Government has the statutory right to sue for defamation under the Government Proceedings Act 1956, contrary to the common law principles prohibiting such actions.

[1] This judgment is prepared pursuant to s 78(1) of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, as our learned brother, Justice A Samah Nordin has since retired.

[2] In this judgment, the parties will be referred to as they were in the proceedings in the High Court.

[3] This case concerns the defendant's appeal against the majority decision of the Court of Appeal on 7 April 2016, reversing the decision of the High Court Kuching which had, on 28 April 2014, dismissed the plaintiffs' claim for libel against the defendant.

[4] The leave to appeal to this Court was granted on the following questions:

(1) Whether the Government Proceedings Act 1956 (Act 359), and in particular s 3 therein, precludes the principle in Derbyshire County Council v. Times Newspaper Ltd & Ors [1993] AC 534 ("Derbyshire") to be extended to the Government of Sarawak?

(2) Whether s 3(1)(c) of the Civil Law Act 1956 (Act 67) precludes the principle in Derbyshire to be extended to the Government?

(3) Whether a party (having pleaded various causes of action, issues or defences, as the case may be), who makes an application under O 14A of the Rules of 2012 ("ROC") to determine one or more of the issues (but not all) pleaded by the party, is deemed to have elected to have abandoned all other causes of action, issues or defences, pleaded by the party?

[5] The background facts leading to the present appeal are these. The 1st plaintiff is the Government of the State of Sarawak. The 2nd plaintiff is the State Financial Authority of the 1st plaintiff. The defendant, then Vice Chairman of Democratic Action Party (DAP) was a Member of Parliament for Bandar Kuching as well as a member of the Sarawak State Assembly for Kota Sentosa. The plaintiffs sued the defendant for libel, alleging that the defendant had made defamatory statements concerning mismanagement of the State Financial affairs. The statement was published in the Sin Chew Daily on 3 January 2013 and in the DAP's leaflet, both in Chinese and English. The statement was also published in an online news portal Malaysiakini on 18 February 2013. The DAP's leaflet contains a drawing of the figure "RM11,000,000,000.00" being sucked into a whirl pool with a black hole at the centre.

[6] Among the statements which were attributed to the defendant as translated into English [see Appendix D to the Amended Statement of Claim] are as follows:

"Chong said since 2006, there is an item in the State Budget which appears mysterious, namely "Government Allocation For Trust Fund" and this Trust Fund is made up of 50% of the Development Fund. The Chief Minister being the Minister of Finance failed to explain who are the beneficiaries of such a big allocation of fund. He said that DAP ADUN have raised this issue and the answer is that the Chief Minister has approved this fund to corporations, companies or organisations which are approved to promote economic, social or educational activities or development of Sarawak. Chong said that these agencies are cronies and the so-called development of Sarawak is really meant for development of his family business. What is meant for public becomes something personal. Often state land is given out to the family companies at a very low price so that the companies can reap huge profits - and this is what BN called economic development of Sarawak. He said such fund allocation contravenes parliamentary democracy because under democratic practice, the Government must account for every cent it has spent and it has to be properly accounted for in the Council Negeri. Now Chong asked why did the state Government hide su