The Operation of Libel Law on the Media

The Operation of Libel Law on the Media

Good morning ladies and gentleman. I am Amalin and welcome to our forum discussion today which touches on the issue of The Operation of Libel Law on the Media.

Allow me to introduce our panels for this debatable discussion. On my left our specially invited Minister of Multimedia Malaysia, Yang Berhormat Datuk Seri Muhammad Aiman Syahmi, our expert on the libel law and I’m sure you have everything in your sleeves for this morning.

Beside him is Miss Najwa, an experienced columnist from Daily Moon Newspaper. She has been serving in this industry for almost 12 years now and I’m sure she has some fascinating stories to tell about her career in this industry.

On the other hand, I have a distinguished lawyer beside me, Mrs. Premela who will be sharing with us the legal point of view in relation to the libel law on the media, hence audiences may need to lend their ears carefully on this one.

At the end of the corner is one brave girl, Miss Felicia. She is here to talk about how she handled the situation from being a victim of this notorious operation.

Hope all of you have been in pink of health.

Nowadays, the media have assumed and reinforced their important role as a legitimate reflection of public interest and opinion. However, the media are peculiarly vulnerable to error of confusing the public interest with their own interest. As a matter of fact, people have increasingly begun to seek refuge and vindication of litigation. Thus Yang Berhormat, we would like to know what is libel all about and how does it utilize the media?

Yang Berhormat Datuk Seri Muhammad Aiman Syahmi –What is libel all about and how does it utilize the media?

In Malaysia, the concept of libel law cannot be addressed in isolation without making a cross reference to the law of defamation. The law of defamation in Malaysia is primarily based on the English common law principles except insofar as it has been modified by the Malaysian Defamation Act 1957

The Malaysian Defamation Act 1957 is in pari materia with the English Defamation Act 1952.

Hence, it is perhaps vital for us to first look into the meaning of the term ‘defamation’ before focusing the discussion on the concept of libel law. The Malaysian Defamation Act 1957 does not define the term ‘defamation’.

The matter is governed by common law. Under common law, defamation refers to “the publication of untrue statement of fact which reflects on a person’s reputation and tends to lower him in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally or tends to make them shun or avoid him”

The common law recognized two forms of defamation that is libel and slander. In England, libel is a tort as well as a crime whereas slander is only a tort and not a crime.

In Malaysia, libel and slander are both torts and crimes.

It is an established rule that defamation occurs where a material is read, heard or observed and the person defamed has a reputation to protect, not where the material originated. Thus, in the context of this paper the authors intend to pay attention to the discussion on libel rather than slander.      

Turning back to the concept of libel law, the difference lies in the means or medium by which the defamatory material is communicated. Libel is defamation in a permanent form usually visible to the eye, such as items in writing which include e-mail, pictures, statutes or effigies.

Libel is actionable per se, which means that a plaintiff need not prove any damages. In other words, a plaintiff who brings libel action does not have to prove that he has suffered any loss or injury as a result of the published statement. This is because the law presumes that when a person’s reputation is assailed, some damage must result.

Although the media act as a powerful channel for conveying and disseminating information in a democratic environment, it is undeniable fact that the media at times are peculiarly vulnerable to error of confusing the public interest with their own interest.

Hence, it is vital to note that in the process of conveying and disseminating the information, there is a need for the media to exercise self-regulation and to be a socially responsible vehicle of communication since the right to publish is not absolute.

In essence, and in truth, the various laws that we have today were never intended to “kill” the creativity of journalists and media people, but to sanction and bring to book the writers who carry poison pens, and those so-called writers who love to lace their writings with innuendoes, defamation and sedition that may lead to instability and lawlessness.      

Having said that, experience in Malaysia shows that there are host of laws regulating the operation of the media. The restrictions imposed on the media can be prior or subsequent, civil or criminal

For example, all censorship laws constitute prior restraints. Some of these laws regulating the operation of the media are: the Official Secrets Act 1972, the Printing Presses and Publications Act 1984, the Sedition Act 1948, the Communications and Multimedia Act 1998 and the Defamation Act 1957.

Thank you Yang Berhormat for the thorough explanation of the libel law, how it differs from slander and the available acts in Malaysia that actually allows for writers to be creative in their view although it is not absolute. I now wonder if there is such thing as ‘press freedom’. Miss Najwa, would you enlighten us on this question?

Miss Najwa – Is there such thing as ‘press freedom’?

As is the case everywhere in the world, the phrase freedom of the press has been defined and butchered many times since the invention of journalism. Every countries worth its mettle have constantly find a way to curtail or redefine these so-called freedom of the press by legislation, rules and interference from the powers-that-be, whether its political or religious and in Malaysian case, both. For the sake of this discourse, its suffice to define 'press freedom' as 'the fundamental right to a democratic society to seek out and circulates news, information, ideas, comment and opinion and holds those in authority to account'.

Press freedom in Malaysia is under Article 10 Clause (1) of the Federal Constitution, which states that “Every citizen has the right to freedom of speech and expression”, but that right is “subject to Clauses (2), (3) and (4)”. The right is given only to citizens and it is not absolute but subject to certain well-defined restrictions, including the security of the Federation, public order, morality, protecting the privileges of Parliament or State Assembly, contempt, defamation, incitement to any offence and sedition. To put it simple, there is a press freedom in Malaysia but subject to a host of limitations.