Court ruling on Waytha's defamation suit 'a powerful message'
A former national adviser of Hindraf, N Ganesan, said the Court of Appeal's decision to allow his appeal against a defamation suit won by National Unity and Social Wellbeing Minister P Waythamoorthy sends a powerful message that citizens need avenues to hold politicians accountable.
Ganesan (above) said the ruling is significant to the common man’s or woman’s involvement in democracy as these politicians have been given mandates as part of the social contract in the system of governance...
A former national adviser of Hindraf, N Ganesan, said the Court of Appeal's decision to allow his appeal against a defamation suit won by National Unity and Social Wellbeing Minister P Waythamoorthy sends a powerful message that citizens need avenues to hold politicians accountable.
Ganesan (above) said the ruling is significant to the common man’s or woman’s involvement in democracy as these politicians have been given mandates as part of the social contract in the system of governance.
"In our context the institution of the mass media plays an important role in this process of accountability," Ganesan told Malaysiakini today, referring to a Tamil daily, which was also sued by Waythamoorthy, who was then Hindraf's co-founder.
"To exercise this process, it becomes necessary that the common man or woman has free access to the mass media without fear of retribution from those they have given the mandates to and held accountable for their later adherence to the mandates," he added.
"Politicians who do not understand this principle should really not participate in our process of democracy," stressed Ganesan, who is currently chairperson of Freedom, an NGO committed to social justice.
Yesterday, a panel of three judges in the Court of Appeal in Putrajaya, headed by Justice Hamid Sultan Abu Backer, allowed Ganesan's appeal against Waythamoorthy's (photo) suit.
Ganesan had denied being the author of an article headlined "Hindraf is splitting again" published on March 13, 2016, in Tamil daily Tamil Nesan, which has now ceased publication.
The Court of Appeal had also ordered Waythamoorthy to pay RM30,000 in costs.
Ganesan had filed an appeal against the judgment of the High Court in Seremban on July 15 last year, which allowed Waythamoorthy’s defamation claim against Ganesan and Tamil Nesan.
The High Court awarded Waythamoorthy damages of RM100,000 and costs of RM20,000 against Ganesan.
'Evidence must be considered impartially'
Ganesan said Court of Appeal ruling is also related to the common discourse of the "rule of law".
In allowing the appeal, Ganesan said, the judges were effectively telling the legal and judicial community that high standards must be applied in translating the law of evidence so that justice will be effectively dispensed.
"Evidence must be considered impartially, completely and in the firm interest of justice," he said.
Ganesan said the judges are reminding the entire legal and judicial fraternity of where they should stand in attempting to realise a truly operational “rule of law” system.
"So, let us get serious and understand the needed new standards, which is what this judgment is indicating."
Counsel GS Nijar, who acted for Ganesan, argued that crucial evidence was "misconstrued" in the High Court, resulting in uncertainty on one party’s evidence and the consistency of the other party’s evidence being disregarded.
The lawyer also pointed out that the trial judge had failed to derive proper benefit from the "undoubted advantage" of seeing and hearing witnesses at the trial.
"In reaching his conclusion, the judge had not properly analysed the entirety of the evidence which was given before him," Nijar said during his submission in court yesterday.
Ganesan said in allowing the appeal, the panel of judges had effectively re-emphasised the principle of the threshold of evidence for the plaintiff (Waythamoorthy) to establish the truth of their claim when the defendant (Ganesan) flatly denied the claim.
"If we want a Malaysia Baru, it has to be rebuilt by destroying old patterns and renewing, with the politicians who won on promises of renewal, actually showing the way.
"The courts are sending signals. The politicians had better see these writings," Ganesan added.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.