Wan Muhammad Azri Wan Deris, who has been identified as the blogger Papagomo, today failed in his application to introduce new evidence in his appeal in Anwar Ibrahim’s suit against him, in which he has been ordered to pay RM800,000.

This follows the Court of Appeal dismissing his application to introduce new evidence which included blog postings on the Papagomo website while he was serving a 14-day jail term in 2012.

The appellate court also dismissed Wan Muhammad Azri’s application to admit the same evidence in another suit filed by lawyer Syukri Mohamed.

Wan Muhammad Azri wanted to admit the evidence to show he is not the notorious blogger Papagomo.

Following this, Justice Alizatul Khair Othman ordered Wan Muhammad Azri to pay costs of RM500 each to Anwar and Syukri.

However, the appellate court granted the blogger an extension of time to file his appeal for the Anwar case.

Despite this, the court ordered Wan Muhammad Azri to pay another RM500 as costs to Anwar for being late in filing the appeal records.

The other judges in the appellate court were Justices Lim Yee Lan and P Nalini.

Wan Muhammad Azri appeared for and represented himself in the applications.

Papagomo found to have defamed Anwar

Previously, it was reported that the Kuala Lumpur High Court had in April ordered Wan Muhammad Azri to pay RM800,000, when it ruled that he had defamed the opposition leader.

Wan Muhammad Azri had denied in the proceeding that he was the blogger Papagomo. This was despite a testimony from another blogger that he was indeed the infamous blogger.

Earlier this month Wan Muhammad Azri also failed in his appeal to the Federal Court in a suit by a businessman, for which the High Court in Kuala Lumpur ruled that he was Papagomo and ordered to him pay RM300,000 for defamation.

In today's proceedings, Wan Muhammad Azri tried to object to lawyer Latheefa Koya appearing for Anwar, citing that she was a party worker with PKR and holds the post in the party’s legal bureau.

However, Justice Alizatul overruled the objection and ordered him to carry on with his submission.

Latheefa objected to Wan Muhammad Azri’s application to introduce new evidence on the grounds that this was never done before the High Court and that they have no opportunity to cross-examine the evidence.

Another lawyer, Hashim Fauzi, who appeared for Syukri, said what Wan Muhammad Azri wanted to adduce is not related to the case.

In the Syukri case, the High Court in Kota Baru dismissed the lawyer’s suit on grounds it could not agree that Wan Muhammad Azri was indeed the blogger.

Related stories

Dr M is wrong, says his 'No 1 enemy' Khairy

Ibrahim to croak on differences with Dr M

Ridhuan backs Dr M, tells Malays to change mindset

Umno Youth: Azmin must defend powers of sultan

Who's to blame for weak Umno if not Mahathir?