Defamation requires the publication of false statements causing reputational harm, with no valid defenses when material facts are omitted.

Mohd Hishamudin Yunus JCA:

Introduction

[1] The appellants were the defendants at the High Court of Shah Alam, and are now appealing before this Court against the High Court's decision. The respondent was the plaintiff at the High Court.

[2] On 19 August 2009, the learned High Court Judge of Shah Alam after a full trial found the defendants liable for defaming the plaintiff and had awarded the latter damages: RM20,000 in general damages, to be paid by the 1^st defendant; RM20,000 in general damages, to be paid by the 2^nd defendant; aggravated damages of RM110,000, to be paid by the 2^nd defendant.

[3] Hence the appeal to this Court. The appeal is against both liability and quantum of damages.

[4] On 21 May 2014, after having heard submissions, we had unanimously dismissed the appeal and affirmed the decision of the High Court Judge on both liability and damages.

[5] We shall now explain the grounds of our decision.

Facts Of The Case

[6] At the material time the plaintiff was a Member of Parliament (MP), an Opposition MP. He was also the head of the youth wing of the political party, known by the acronym 'PAS', and a member of the party's central working committee.

[7] The 1^st defendant, Dato' Rejal Ahmad Arbee, was an employee of the 2^nd defendant, The New Straits Times Press (Malaysia) Berhad: he was the Group Editor of the 2^nd defendant's newspaper, Berita Harian.

[8] The 2^nd defendant was the publisher and printer of the Berita Harian.

[9] The Berita Harian newspaper enjoys a nationwide circulation.

[10] The subject matter of the plaintiff 's defamation action is a piece of news published in the Berita Harian on 9 November 2002 under the heading:

"Mahfuz ajak wakil BN bertumbuk."

[11] The undisputed facts, including the offending part of the news, are set out in paras 5 to 7 of the statement of claim. Briefly, the news alleged that the plaintiff had misbehaved himself and created a nuisance during a debate in Parliament on 8 November 2000 by challenging another Member of Parliament to a fist fight outside the Parliament building. The incident occurred during the debate on the plaintiff 's motion in Parliament on the alleged abuse of power on the part of the police force when taking action against a public gathering at Kampung Jalan Kebun, Kelang. The plaintiff avers in his statement of claim:

5. On Thursday dated 9 November 2002 the 1^st defendant acting as group editor of Berita Harian had falsely and maliciously allowed or caused to be allowed a publication of defamatory news at the front page of the said newspaper concerning the plaintiff in the following words:

Mahfuz ajak wakil BN bertumbuk

Kuala Lumpur, Rabu - Pihak pembangkang sekali lagi membuat kecoh di Dewan Rakyat hari ini, apabila seorang Ahli Parlimen PAS mencabar seorang Ahli Parlimen Barisan Nasional (BN) untuk bertumbuk bagi menyelesaikan perbalahan.

Ketika membahaskan usul berhubung apa yang dikatakan tindakan ganas polis terhadap peserta perhimpunan haram di Klang Ahad lalu, Mahfuz Omar (PAS - Pokok Sena) mencabar Shahziman Abu Bakar (BN-Tampin) bertumbuk di luar Dewan Rakyat. Bagaimanapun, Shahziman dihalang oleh beberapa penyokong kerajaan yang lain yang turut meminta Mahfuz supaya bersabar.

6. The 2^nd defendant acting as the publisher and the printer of the said newspaper had published and printed the said defamatory words mentioned in para 5 of the statement of claim.

7. The said words mentioned in para 5 of the statement of claim directly or indirectly refers to the plaintiff or capable of being understood to refer to the plaintiff.

Particulars of words referred to or understood to refer to the plaintiff

Mahfuz ajak wakil BN bertumbuk

Kuala Lumpur, Rabu - Pihak pembangkang sekali lagi membuat kecoh di Dewan Rakyat hari ini, apa