Back
2024 MarsdenLR 2923
HIGH COURT MALAYA KUALA LUMPUR
ROZ MAWAR ROZAIN, JC
LIM GUAN ENG – Appellant
Versus
MAHIADDIN MD YASSIN – Respondent
[Civil Suit No: WA-23CY-8-03/2023]
The court affirmed that unverified defamatory statements made by a public figure, especially involving serious allegations, are actionable under the Defamation Act 1957.
Headnote:(A) Defamation Act 1957 - Statements made by the Defendant alleged that the Plaintiff revoked tax exemptions for Yayasan Al-Bukhary - Court finds statements defamatory, lacking justification and fair comment - Defendant failed to verify allegations before publication. (Paras 14, 28, 34, 56, 66)
(B) The Plaintiff's reputation as a public figure is crucial, with allegations implying abuse of power and racial bias. (Paras 5, 18, 19, 20)
Facts of the case:
The case involves a defamation suit by the Plaintiff against the Defendant for three statements made in March 2023, alleging misconduct regarding tax exemptions. (Paras 3, 12, 13)
Findings of Court:
The Defendant's statements were found to be defamatory, lacking any factual basis, and made with malice. (Paras 55, 66)
Issues: The main issues include whether the statements were defamatory, referred to the Plaintiff, and the validity of the Defendant's defenses. (Paras 13, 28, 34)
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the Defendant's statements were defamatory as they imputed improper motives to the Plaintiff, and the defenses of justification and fair comment failed due to lack of evidence and malice. (Paras 30, 34, 55)
Result: Plaintiff awarded RM1,050,000.00 in damages, along with a retraction and injunction against further defamatory statements. (Paras 69)
JUDGMENT
[1] "Good name in man and woman, dear my Lord, is the immediate jewel of their souls." These immortal words from Shakespeare's Othello were cited in the Plaintiff's submissions and they resonate deeply in this case, where a man's reputation - that fragile yet precious possession - has been put to trial.
[2] This action for defamation brings into sharp focus the delicate balance between freedom of expression and the right to protect one's reputation. It involves two prominent political figures: the Plaintiff, YB Lim Guan Eng, former Finance Minister of Malaysia, and the Defendant, Tan Sri Mahiaddin bin Md. Yassin, former Prime Minister of Malaysia.
[3] At its core, this case concerns three statements made by the Defendant over a span of four days in March 2023, alleging that the Plaintiff had cancelled or refused to recognize tax exemptions previously granted to Yayasan Al-Bukhary during his tenure as Finance Minister. The allegations, intermixed with references to race and religion, sparked considerable public interest and media coverage.
[4] After a full trial spanning three days from 15 July 2024 to 17 July 2024, and having carefully considered the evidence and submissions of both parties, this Court finds in favour of the Plaintiff. The grounds illustrating the reasoned decision are iterated below.
The Parties
[5] The respective positions and offices held by both parties are crucial to understand the gravity and context of this defamation action. The Plaintiff's progression from Member of Parliament to Chief Minister of Penang and ultimately to Minister of Finance demonstrates his significant standing in public life and the weight his reputation carries. The political party of the Plaintiff is the Democratic Action Party (DAP). Similarly, the Defendant's position as former Prime Minister of Malaysia and current Chairman of Perikatan Nasional not only underscores his prominence but also the credibility and impact his statements would carry with the public. When a former Prime Minister makes allegations against a former Finance Minister, such statements naturally command attention and belief from the general public. The high offices held by both parties therefore amplify both the reach and the potential damage of any defamatory statements, while simultaneously raising legitimate public interest in their conduct and interactions. This context is essential for assessing both the defamatory nature of the statements and the quantum of damages that may be appropriate.
[6] The Plaintiff is a prominent politician who has held several important public offices including:
• Member of Parliament for Kota Melaka (1986-1998)
• Member of Parliament for Bagan, Penang (2008-present)
• Member of Penang State Legislative Assembly for Air Putih (2008-present)
• Chief Minister of Penang (March 2008-May 2018)
• Minister of Finance (May 2018-February 2020)
[7] The Defendant is also a senior politician who has served as:
• Member of Parliament for Pagoh
• Prime Minister of Malaysia (March 2020-August 2021)
• Chairman of Perikatan Nasional
Background Facts
[8] The sequence of events leading to this suit can be summarized and it all started on 9 March 2023 when the Defendant was summoned to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) headquarters in Putrajaya for questioning related to alleged abuse of power and corruption during his tenure as the Prime Minister. After being released that evening, at approximately 10:12pm, the Defendant published a press statement on his Facebook account (the First Statement).
[9] In the First Statement, while explaining matters relating to the MACC investigation when he was called in by the MACC, the Defendant made allegations about the Plaintiff and Yayasan Al-Bukhary, specifically stating:
"Saya datang pagi tadi untuk membolehkan SPRM merakam percakapan tambahan saya. Saya hadir tanpa paksaan untuk membantu siasatan...
4.3 Inilah faktanya:
(a) Yayasan Al-Bukhary menjalankan kerja-kerja amal dan kebaji
