2001 MarsdenLR 506
HIGH COURT MALAYA, KUALA LUMPUR
RK NATHAN J
HALIM ARSYAT
versus
SISTEM TELEVISYEN MALAYSIA BHD
SUIT NO: S2-23-35-1998
Decided On : 07-02-01
For the plaintiff - Mohamed Hanipa Maidin; M/s Mohamed Hanipa & Assocs
For the defendants - PH Looi; M/s Zaid Ibrahim & Co
RK Nathan J:
Facts
The plaintiff was at the material time the Secretary General of the Islamic Party of Malaysia (PAS). He was also the permit holder of a PAS's newspaper known as Harakah. He was and is still a member of the board of directors of Harakah. Since 1994 the permit of Harakah had been issued under his name. The permit is issued annually by the Home Ministry (KDN) upon an application being made. The 1st defendant is a private broadcasting station popularly known as TV3. The 2nd defendant was the operations manager of TV3. The 3rd defendant was the producer of the news bulletin aired on 18 July 1997, also known as "Buletin Utama". The said programme is a daily news bulletin aired at prime time, that is, between 8pm to 9pm.
The Publication
On 18 August 1997 at about 8pm, during the said programme the defendants broadcast or caused to be broadcast and published the following:
INTRO
Dalam pada itu, pucuk pimpinan UMNO mengarahkan Biro Agama dan Penerangan berkempen bagi menjawab tuduhan berkenaan demi perpaduan umat Islam di negara ini.
Ia berikutan tuduhan murtad terhadap Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad disifat bertujuan melemah dan mengancam perpaduan umat Islam yang sekaligus menguntungkan musuh.
VOICE OVER
Menteri di Jabatan Perdana Menteri, Datuk Dr. Hamid Othman berkata Presiden parti Datuk Seri Dr. Mahathir Mohamad mengarahkan beliau menjawab tuduhan itu.
Beliau mengakui tuduhan sedemikian sedikit sebanyak akan mempengaruhi ahli UMNO terutama di kawasan pedalaman.
Sehubungan itu, selain menumpukan perhatian kepada orang ramai Biro Agama juga katanya akan meyakinkan ahlinya.
SOT IN: Datuk Dr. Hamid Othman
Penerangan yang jelas mengenai politik dan hubungannya dengan akidah itu satu, yang kedua ialah tentang perjuangan kita membina umah ini ialah dua aspek akidah dan aspek pencapaian hidup ini, khazanah di dunia ini, khazanah di akhirat ini, dua perkara ini mesti diterangkan.
SOT OUT:
Mengenai tabloid Harakah yang menyiarkan rencana mendakwa Perdana Menteri murtad, Pusat Islam katanya akan mencadangkan kepada Kementerian Dalam Negeri untuk mengkaji semula permit akhbar itu.
Dalam perkembangan sama, Menteri Besar Kedah, Tan Sri Sanusi Junid berkata tuduhan sedemikian mampu memecahbelahkan umat Islam.
Mereka yang iri hati dengan kejayaan Malaysia pasti bergembira sedangkan Perdana Menteri disifatkan sebagai pemimpin umat Islam bertaraf dunia.
Sehubungan itu, UMNO Kedah akan menentang tuduhan itu habis-habisan.
SOT IN: Tan Sri Sanusi Junid
Saya challenge mari ke Kedah, kata kat Dr. Mahathir yang bukan-bukan. Saya challenge suruh mai, nak tengok mandi darah ke tak, sila datang ke Kedah dan cerca Dr. Mahathir, saya akan gerakkan seluruh barisan pemuda, orang tua untuk menentang sehabis-habisan, jangan eklah, bab bergaduh ni saya ada pengalaman.
SOT OUT:
The Claim
By the amended statement of claim the plaintiff claims that the defendants falsely and maliciously broadcast or caused to be broadcast of and concerning him as the then Secretary General of PAS and the permit holder of Harakah, the words complained of in the said "Bulletin Utama" which were defamatory of him and that the words viewed in the context of the said telecast were understood to refer to him.
The plaintiff thus claims damages in the sum of RM20 million against each of the defendants with interest and costs and a further order to direct the defendants to tender their apologies by broadcasting the same in the "Buletin Utama" for three days consecutively.
By their defence, the defendants deny that the words in the said "Buletin Utama" either referred to the plaintiff or bore the meanings respectively as alleged by the plaintiff. In the alternative, the defendants raised the defences of justification and fair comment. The defence of fair comment was later dropped. In addition, and as a further alternative, they raised the defence of qualified privilege.
Findings Of The Court
Who Is The Plaintiff?
The plaintiff who was at all material times the Sec