Back
2014 MarsdenLR 1511
COURT OF APPEAL PUTRAJAYA
DATO IBRAHIM ALI – Appellant
Versus
DATUK SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM – Respondent
[Civil Appeal No: W-02(IM)(NCVC)-2581-11-2013]
Contempt of court liability requires actual knowledge of the contemptuous material; mere office holding does not establish culpability.
Headnote:(A) Societies Act 1966 - Sections 51(1) and 51(2) - Defamation - Contempt of court - Appellant contends lack of knowledge of contemptuous article published on alleged official website - The court finds an absence of evidence proving that the appellant was aware of the article beforehand; mere position cannot infer liability. (Paras 1, 19, 20, 24, 46)
(B) Contempt by omission - The concept requires actual knowledge of the content for liability to persist; the learned judge's finding of contempt based solely on silence and position is legally flawed. (Paras 41, 42, 43)
Facts of the case:
The suit involved a defamation action against individuals for publishing a contemptuous article that scandalised the court while a decision was pending. The second contemnor appealed the ruling of contempt due to insufficient evidence of his knowledge or involvement in the publication. (Paras 1, 12, 23)
Findings of Court:
The court determined that the second contemnor did not commit contempt of court, as there was no evidence showing that he had knowledge of the offending material published on the website. The court set aside the punishment of imprisonment and fine. (Paras 46)
Issues: The court addressed whether the alleged official website was linked to PERKASA, and whether the second contemnor had knowledge of the contemptuous publication at the time it was posted. (Paras 25)
Ratio Decidendi: The ruling emphasized that mere position does not imply knowledge or responsibility for contempt; actual knowledge must be demonstrated. The court's conclusion rested on the pivotal question of constructive knowledge versus actual knowledge of the published material. (Paras 40, 44)
Result: Appeal allowed; contempt findings set aside and any imposed fines ordered to be refunded.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. defamation suit and contempt proceedings (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
[1] The principal suit was a defamation action brought by the plaintiff against a newspaper and another. This suit had been tried before VT Singham J and the court had fixed the 21 March 2013 for delivery of decision.
[2] On 7 January 2013 an article entitled "Kes Saman Utusan: Mahkamah Malaysia Bodoh Jika Anwar Menang" was found published on the website with the URL address of "http:www.pribumiperkasa.com/" (the article).
[3] The plaintiff commenced proceedings against:
(a) Zainuddin bin Salleh, and
(b) Ibrahim bin Ali
to commit them for contempt of court with regard to the publication of the article.
[4] John Louis O'Hara J at the High court on 19 November 2013 held that both Zainuddin bin Salleh (first contemnor) and Ibrahim bin Ali (second contemnor) were guilty of contempt of court. His Lordship proceeded to:
(a) commit the first contemnor to prison for a period of four weeks from that date, and
(b) commit the second contemnor to prison for one day and also to fine him RM20,000.00, in default of payment of the fine, a further two weeks imprisonment.
[5] This appeal before us was the appeal of the second contemnor against both the finding of contempt and the sentence imposed by the court against him. (The first contemnor had also lodged an appeal against committal order made against him on 13 November 2013 but has since withdrawn his appeal.)
