The Federal Court agreed today to hear further arguments on whether Youth and Sports Minister Khairy Jamaluddin Abu Bakar can amend his defence statement on the defamation suit Anwar Ibrahim filed against him in 2008.

Presiding judge Court of Appeal president Justice Md Raus Sharif allowed the two questions of law posed by Khairy’s lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

The other judges sitting with him at the Palace of Justice in Putrajaya were Federal court judges Justices Ahmad Ma’arop, Md Apandi Ali, Abu Samah Nordin and Ramly Ali.

The High Court in Kuala Lumpur and the Court of Appeal had earlier rejected Khairy’s application to amend his defence statement.

Anwar filed the defamation suit in 2008, following Khairy’s remarks during the 2008 general election campaign.

Anwar filed his RM100 million suit in 2008 for Khairy’s remarks at the campaign event in Lembah Pantai.

The two questions that Khairy's counsel posed, to be decided by the Federal Court are:

  • Whether common law defence of “partial justification”, as propounded in Goody vs Odham Press Ltd (1966) matter, is available as a defence in Malaysia against any defamation action;

 

  • Does the amendment by the applicant/defendant (Khairy) fall within the applicable and legal parameters (which enable amendments) of the three-fold test in Yamaha Motors and Order 20, Rule 5, of the Rules of Court 2012, where “partial justification” was proposed in the amendments (at Paragraph 12 of the proposed amended defence), based on specific findings in the Federal Court in the decision of Anwar Ibrahim vs PP (2004), which was upheld in the Federal Court in 2014, upon the respondent attempting to expunge the specific paragraph in the said 2004 Federal Court decision.

    • Shafee submitted that while Anwar was acquitted of Sodomy I by the Federal Court, the majority judgment held that indeed the homosexual activities did occur.

    “I would say they (the Federal Court) made a finding of fact that there was evidence of homosexual activity,” he submitted.

    “What is relevant is the partial judgment that stated this fact,” Shafee said.

    Anwar had, on March 26, failed to expunge that part in former Chief Justice Abdul Hamid Mohamad's majority judgment in 2004.

    Must prove the allegations are true

    However, senior lawyer Sulaiman Abdullah, appearing for Anwar, warned that what Shafee wanted does not fit the rules set by the courts.

    Sulaiman cited Rule 3(2), where in an action of slander, insofar as it consists of a statement of fact, the person must prove the allegations are true.

    Furthermore, Sulaiman ( left ) said Anwar had filed the action in 2008 and it had been lingering since then without it being heard in court.

    Outside the court, Shafee explained to reporters that in the Goody case, the person was a robber and the paper called him a robber, based on the court's partial judgment.

    Hence, he said, his client should be allowed to amend his statement of defence to state the fact from the 2004 Sodomy I judgment.

    Shafee said it would be absurd if Khairy is not allowed to insert it, since the judgment was made by a court of law.

    On March 7, 2008, Anwar sued Khairy, who was then Umno Youth deputy chief, for uttering defamatory words and caused the defamation to be posted on websites, including a Malaysiakini.com video clip titled ‘Anwar and kin no threat’.

    The Court of Appeal had earlier dismissed Khairy's application to amend his defence statement.

    Khairy at the ceramah had given the audience the impression that Anwar is a homosexual, and a man of low morals who also has no Islamic values.

    Related stories

    Explain why water deal secret, Putrajaya told

    How does a water deal threaten security?

    Khusrin tells civil servants to back MB Azmin

    'Friday prayers law treats Kelantanese like criminals'

    Anwar to speak at UM before sodomy appeal

    PKR rep drops appeal on sedition charge