Defamation suit is not necessarily an attack on press freedom, on the contrary ...

“They cannot hope to cover themselves or hide from the laws. What is freedom without responsibility?” - PM Abdullah Badawi on the historic 2007 defamation lawsuit against two bloggers (Aljazeera)

Jalan Tangsi: Four decades as a journalist and I have become some kind of an expert on the matter of defamation, I think, even though I've never had the chance to read law, let alone practise it. The newsroom is the best of gurus.

And the courtroom, too, of course.

 In 2007, barely six months after parting ways with the New Straits Times Press, I was dragged into what Google describes as a "historic defamation lawsuit*** that changed the media landscape in the country". It was the first time on Earth that a newspaper company was suing a blogger for defamation. 

My legal battle would drag on for five years and has made me the wiser: a defamation suit cannot kill press freedom; on the contrary, it provides the journalist an opportunity in front of the whole world to prove that he has, to the best of his ability, reported the truth or he has been fair to all parties in his commentary.

It is not defamation if it is true.

Journalists from my era, those who started reporting in the 1980s, have seen some of the biggest defamation cases. The 1990s was the decade of mega awards, when the norm was for tycoons and corporations who believed they had been defamed would seek tens and sometimes hundreds of million in compensation and damages. The 2000s saw a string of lawsuits against blogs.

But we also had other, bigger concerns, the ISA and the OSA chief among them, yes, some of our bosses and colleagues had been incarcerated without trial. On top of that, there were scores of laws that could be used to shut your publication down without notice and put you out to pasture. 

The police raid on the home of journalist Nantha last April over his reports on foreign workers, now that had a chilling effect on journalists. 

But with a defamation suit, a journalist get to fight it out in court. 

I have my own rules or principles pertaining to defamation: one, journalists (and newspapers or media companies) have no business suing anyone for defamation; and, two, a politician should only sue another politician for defamation.

Salim Fateh Din, who is suing journalist P. Gunasegaram for defamation, is neither journalist nor politician. 

He is deputy executive chairman of MRCB, a public-listed property development, engineering and construction company. The EPF is the largest single shareholder of MRCB. 

So if Salim decides to sue journalists in this country (which he has on several occassions), journalists in foreign countries (most recently against Murray Hunter), politicians (he recently won a case against a former assemblyman), or anyone else, for that matter, to defend his reputation or the reputation of his family or company, that is his business and his right. 

Bear in mind that when someone is sued for defamation, he is not doomed. Whether he is sued for RM1 or RM240 million (probably the biggest case on record in Malaysia) is immaterial, the defendant must still prove his case.

The system gives the defendant ample opportunity to prove defend himself or herself against the accusation. 

I know at least a couple of journalists who were sued successfully by Salim for defamation in the past. One of them was ordered to pay the businessman a sum but after a post-hearing table talk and after one party offered a belated but sincere apology, Salim waived that money. All he wanted, Salim had said later, was to protect his reputation. 

Last year Salim succesfully sued Murray Hunter, the former lecturer at a Perlis university who has found fun and fame in Thailand as a blogger specialising in finding fault with everything Malaysian. The lawsuit was filed in Thailand. The arms of the law are long. Read my postings on the matter at rockybru.com.my

Hunter had a lot to say until reality hit him, which is, the laws are clear about defamation, yes, and the colour of your skin, your nationality, and your seniority do not count, what matters are facts, the truth and your intentions.

Hunter made a public apology to Salim and admitted that he had defamed the Malaysian.

In another case, involving  Chegubard, Salim and the blogger settled their differences out of court. No public apologies were recorded, none in chamber as well, if I'm not mistaken.

Gunasegaram is no Murray Hunter or Chegubard, of course, like langit dan bumi. He was already an established byline when I interned at Business Times some 42 years ago. This.is not his first multi-million ringgit defamation suit. He lost his job (not at BT) purportedly because he published an article that made Proton the national car look bad.

The RM100 million defamation against Guna is not an attack on the journalist and definitely not on presa freedom. Salim felt he had been defamed by Guna, asked the journalist to apologize and bring down the article, and filed the suit only when Guna said he would stand by his article and would not apologize.

Gunasegaram is a bigger expert than me on matters pertaining to defamation, that I am sure of. He  will agree with me that while it will be an inconvenience, a great one perhaps, the lawsuit is an opportunity to prove that his commentary or report was was factual, a fair comment in the interest of the public, and was done without malice.

A chance in the court room, not just the court of public opinion, to uphold and fortify that freedom.

In Malaysia's defamation history, the highest payout was RM7 million in the.Ling Wah Press vs Vincent Tan in 2000. Ironically, this was over a series of articles accusing tycoon Vincent Tan, the owner of the Sun newspaper, of using his media group to manipulate politicians and advance his business interest. 

*** The historic 2007 defamation lawsuit against Ahirudin Attan (Rocky Bru) ended in January 2012 when the case was settled out of court. [1, 2]

The legal battle drew to a close with a mutual resolution after dragging on for five years:

• The Corporate Withdrawal: The primary corporate plaintiff, The New Straits Times Press (NSTP), formally dropped its part of the lawsuit against Ahirudin in September 2010. [1, 2]
• The Apology in Chambers: The remaining suit, driven by four former top NSTP executives (including former deputy chairman Datuk Seri Kalimullah Masheerul Hassan), was resolved when Ahirudin agreed to a recorded statement of settlement. He apologized for the "distress, embarrassment, and inconvenience" caused by the 48 blog posts under dispute, withdrew the specific allegations, and published the apology on his blog. [1, 2, 3]
• No Money Exchanged: Crucially, in the spirit of an amicable resolution, both sides agreed that no damages or court costs would be paid. [1]

By ending in a cost-free settlement rather than a massive financial judgment, the conclusion was widely seen as a landmark victory for the survival and freedom of independent political blogging and cyber-journalism in Malaysia.

Tabung Haji: RCI findings won't solve anything but they need to be made public, anyway

Bangsar: The right thing for PM Anwar Ibrahim to do when his Cabinet meets tomorrow to decide on whether to make public the Royal Commission of Inquiry's findings on Tabung Haji is to make public those findings. Anything else, ie to NOT make public the RCI findings on the pilgrimage fund, is unacceptable, sinful even. Whose sons or daughters will be dragged in mud with the disclosure is immaterial as what is more important is for Anwar's administration to be forthcoming. TH depositors deserve the truth on the matter and, yes, as all Malaysians do.

The PMX and his Cabinet must bear in mind, though, that the RCI findinds will not solve anything or satisfy everyone. They will shed light on who wronged us, they will name names, and put things in context or perspective. But after all the disclosure has been made, be prepared for those clamouring for the RCI findings to be made public to NOT accept the truth as painted or suggested by those findings. Because the truth is, sadly, nobody respects RCI if it does not suit their agenda. The word "royal", nonwithstanding. Tell me, do the crooks fear the Royal Malaysian Police, do the unpatriotic respect our Royal army? 

The RCI on Teoh Beng Hock, just to prove my point, does anyone respect the findings? Hardly anyone even remembers what the findings of the RCI on TBH were, right, for what we is the cause of his death is still debated, mourned and, of.course, politicised.

That shall be the fate of the RCI on TH. Some quarters will disagree with the findings, some people will contest them till the cows come home, and politicians will make it fodder for their future campaigns, yes, they will find a way to, somehow, they always do.

But these are no concerns of the PMX and his Cabinet even though, undoubtedly, the findings may implicate their friends, maybe their relatives, certainly their party members, former bosses, colleagues or whoever they may be, dead or alive. The PMX's concern - only concern - is to respect the Royal Commission of Inquiry by making public the findings so that future generations of Malaysians can learn to live with our mistakes and maybe even forgive us.

Ends 

Why, ultimately, Johor election is a victory for Anwar's Unity Government

July 15: Barisan Nasional, the coalition defeated at long last in the general elections eight years ago, won 48 out of 56 of the state seats in Johor last Saturday, a victory so resounding that even the most seasoned analysts imagined they could see the phoenix rising from the ashes, the beginning of the Blue Wave, the revival of Umno. 

They've also decided, in their panic or perhaps in their excitement, that Johor's outcome was a blow for Pakatan Harapan, a bad omen for Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.

My ex Business Times colleague P. Gunasesgaram, in his column for Malaysiakini, was so bold as to even write off not just DAP and PKR’s fate in the next general election but also Anwar”s chances of becoming prime minister for a second term. 

“If Anwar reads the tea leaves right, he will want to go full term and retire,” Guna writes in Sombre, sober reflections on Johor elections.

Well, now, that’s where I beg to differ and I’m not the only one. A veteran journalist (who, with Guna and I, worked at Balai Berita together during the 1980s), did the math:

“BN won 48 seats and PH won 8 in Johor state, right. At Federal level, BN and PH are part of the Unity Governnent. So, excuse me if I see it as it really is: a clean sweep of Johor by these two major components of the Unity Government, yes, because it was a clean sweep, indeed.

"Together BN and PH won all 56 seats in Johor and together the two have totally obliterated the Opposition.” 

The Unity Government, or Kerajaan Perpaduan, was formed at the heels of the 2022 general elections after no single party had enough seats on its own to form the federal government.

Branded later on as Madani, the Unity Government consists primarily of four major political coalitions of political friends and foes: Pakatan Harapan or PH, led by Anwar himself; Barisan Nasional, led by Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi; Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS), whose leader Abang Jo is also the Sarawak Premier; and Gabungan Rakyat Sabah (GRS), led by Sabah Chief Minister Hajiji Noor. 

In the Dewan Rakyat, these four coalitions collectively control 141 seats out of the 222 total seats: Anwar’s PH 82 seats. Zahid’s BN 30 seats, Abang Jo’s GPS 23 seats and Hajiji’s GRS 6 seats.

Add former Sabah  Chief Minister Shafie Apdal’s Warisan party’s three seats and other indepedent MPs who have pledged allegiance to Anwar, the total seats that the Unity government control in the Dewan Rakyat surpass 150. 

The Unity Government’s main opposition are the parties that formed the Perikatan Nasional coalition, the branchild of former PM Muhyiddin Yasin. They include Bersatu, PAS, Pejuang, MIPP, Gerakan and Wawasan. Others against the Unity Government  are Muda and Bersama. All these parties contested in Johor but did not win a single seat. Nihil. Zero. Habuk pun tarak. 

To remind you how badly they did in Johor, all 15 candidates from the overly hyped-up Bersama party led by the overly-confident Rafizi Ramli did not just lose but each one had to forfeit his/her RM5,000 deposit for failing to secure one-eight of the votes cast. Read 55 candidates lose deposits, including all Bersama hopefuls.

Despite this, Guna is still sure that Rafizi’s Bersama will “take votes away from PKR and DAP especially in urban areas” at the next GE.

"It will take them at least until the next polls before they can become a threatening third force with their laudable and very reasonable Malaysian approach - the only one likely to give long-term benefits to all Malaysians”.

Well, we have our own views on Bersama being "the only one" and on Rafizi's own chances at the next GE after the major flop in Johor but I will leave that be for another day, another posting. Perhaps.

For now, the most fantastic takeaway from Johor has to be the bragging by PAS, that the party was actually instrumental in helping Umno rise from the ashes in Johor. Something like "we died so Umno could live", in the name of Malay Unity, no less.

Menteri Besar Onn Hafiz, despite his youth, fortunately, was wise to this ploy all along and had maintained, during the run up to last Saturday’s polls, that his new government, should BN won, would not include PAS.

Not all are as wise. Dr Akmal Salleh, the Umno Youth leader, is known to have said he would welcome PAS-Umno collaborations in Negri Sembilan, which holds its state elections on August 1.

Personally, I hope Dr Akmal will come around and waste no more of his huge potential, and our time, on this so-calledl Malay Unity.

The Malays are older than Christ and we have been in this region longer than the other races, yes, so we are not about to fall for this Malay Unity or Malays-vote-Malays ploy.

Going forward, analysts view Negri Sembilan's elections as a continuation of the tussle between BN and PH: if BN wins, it's the downfall of PKR-DAP and Anwar Ibrahim buf if PH wins, some people will say the Malays in NS are doomed.

But at the end of the day, this is what will happen: the Negri Sembilan election will see PH and BN, once again, kick the asses of PAS and its partners in Perikatan Nasional. As in Johor, you can be100 per cent sure Negri Sembilan will remain with PMX's Unity Government.

And when the inevitable happens, when Johor and Negri Sembilan both are under the two biggest coalitions in the Kerajaan Perpaduan, how is that going to put paid to PM Anwar Ibrahim's chances of a second term?

Deja vu as ringgit touches 3.80

I had a moment of deja vu when my young friend Muda, a Malaysian in the US, tagged me to his post about the ringgit doing 3.8997 against the greenback on Wednesday. "Let's go @anwaribrahim_my. Next stop 3.75." 

The ringgit has seen a strong resurgence, indeed, emerging as one of Asia's best-performing currencies this year, driven by robust economic fundamentals, rising tech exports, and investor confidence. 

It had not smelled 3.80 in a decade. Some predicted it never would. 

"3.80 is a magical number. Tun Mahathir pegged the ringgit at 3.80 against the greenback the same day he sacked Anwar Ibrahim in 98," I replied to Muda. 

He was probably too young to have any memory of that tumultuous time. 

It was September 2 1998, the height of the Asian Financial Crisis. Mahathir Mohamad, the PM then, was facing mounting pressue to step down. His couterparts in Thailand and Indonesia had already subscribed to IMF's rescue plan. 

But instead of "succumbing", Mahathir decided to go rogue by pegging the ringgit and enforcing other capital controls. He also sacked his deputy, who was proving to be a major threat. Anwar, also Finance Minister, was a strong advocate of IMF's remedy for Malaysia and the region. His sin, however, was for implying that Mahathir was the reason behind the deep-rooted corruption, cronyism and nepotism responsible for the country's vulnerability during the crisis. 

I was the Editor of Business Times, Malaysia's only financial daily at the time. I remember wanting to lead the next day's edition with the sacking but Kadir Jasin, the Group Editor In Chief, said BT should go with pegging and capital controls. Both were sensational. 

The sacking was just a start. Anwar was later tried for sodomy and corruption. He was detained without trial under the Internal Securities Act and then a total of 11 years behind bars. 

The peg was lifted in 2005. Anwar was kept in jail, on and off, until his royal pardon in 2018.

Today, 28 years on, Anwar is the Prime Minister after winning the 2022 General Election, the same one that saw Mahathir, now 100, lose badly (his first election defeat in 53 years!).

The ringgit was never the same after the Asian Financial Crisis. After the peg was removed in 2005, the best it did was 3.16. In 2015 when the 1MDB shit hit the fan, it fell to historical lows. The last time it tested 3.80 was in 2015.. By the time Mahathir ended his ill-fated second tour as PM in 2020, the ringgit stayed down around 4.80. 

When Anwar became PM on 24 Nov 2022, the ringgit surged by 1.8 percent, it's largest single-day gain since March 2016. The next day it improved further to 4.45 vs dollar. But analysts were not impressed. A flash in the pan. Many predicted the currency would remain weak. 

Dr Sailesh K. Jha, RHB Bank's group chief economist and head of financial market research, was just one of them: "Our year-end target is 4.6, and the first half of next year (2023), we're at 4.7 to 4.8. So there's been no major changes in our currency view." 

Fast forward to the start of 2026, analysts remained diffident. The Edge spoke to two of them on Jan 8. While Mizuho Research said the Malaysian currency could breach the 4.00 threshold in the second quarter, it's average forecast for the year was about 4.015, "with the ringgit spending most of 2026 knocking on the door of 4.00."

UOB Global Economics and Markets was even more cautious. Despite Malaysia's "remarkable fundamentals", its FX Strategist Peter Chia saw the ringgit as somewhat overbought. "We are a little more cautious about projecting strength beyond the 4.00 level at this point in time. Our forecast is for the ringgit to stay around four." 

The ringgit had other ideas. Last Friday it closed 3.9030 against the USD. Over the past month, MYR has strengthened 3.55 per cent and over the last one year, it is up by nearly 12 per cent. 

Robust economic performance, rising exports, investor confidence. 

Still, there's a lesson we should learn from those faithless analysts (and from the Asian Financial Crisis, too, for that matter): We must remain cautious and translate that caution into vigilance. The good work of the last year, especially, must continue. The fight against the corrupt cannot falter. 

We have seen how fragile currencies and economies, including our own, can be.  Get the people to take to the streets, disseminate fake information and alarming news, undermine institutions like the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, and create political instability. 

Already we are seeing this happening: frustrated politicians promoting havoc, mad mob cheering on people who openly admit to giving bribes, the rich corrupt (under MACC investigation) engaging foreign agents to carry out economic sabotage. 

It does not take much to spook investors. 

What the pork!?

Feb 17: Did you know that it is illegal to bring in pork and pork-based products into Malaysia at the KL International Airport? 

Well, up till yesterday we were ignorant. So when pre-landing announcement on flight MH0749 from Danang said so, we looked at each other,  startled. 

Since when? 

The last time we came back through KLIA was a month ago, from a mountaineering trip in Nepal. We were flying  Batik Air and there was no such announcement. As usual, passengers were reminded that Malaysia had tough laws on smuggling of illicit drugs. The death penalty awaits anyone convicted.

On Malaysia Airlines flight back yesterday, passengers were told that besides illicit drugs, the Malaysian government bars the importation of pork (khinzir was used in the Malay announcement) and pork-based products. If you are carrying any, do get rid of them at "quarantine bins" designated along the way to the airport Customs and. Immigration point. Failure to do so could get you in real trouble. You could be fined up to RM100, 000 in fine or jailed six months, or even both. 

We consider ourselves quite the seasoned travellers so not knowing this prohibition on pork and pork-based products had left us stumped and sheepish. When did this new law come into effect? 

A quick check with Google confirms that Malaysia staeted strictly prohibiting the import of pork and pork-based products from several countries (including 

China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Vietnam) in September 2018 due to the African Swine Fever. 

It was supposed to be a temporary measure but in May 2024 local newspaper The Sun reported that the Malaysian government was maintaining the ban due to health concerns. 

The Malaysian government issued the import ban through the Veterinary Services and Customs departments, in accordance with the Malaysian Quarantine and Inspection Services Act 2011 (Act 728).

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) reported the ASF outbreak in Malaysia in October 2023. The first confirmed ASF case was in February 2021 in Sabah, with subsequent cases in the peninsula in December the same year. In July 2023, ASF was detected in wild boars in Perak, followed by outbreaks on swine farms in Perak and Kedah in October.

Well, it is good to know that the recent bruhaha over pig farming in Selangor has nothing to do with the pork ban in KLIA. The Sultan of Selangor, irked by recent approvals for large-scale pig-farming activities in his state, suggested that those in the porky business import instead. 

In any case, there won't ever be a shortage of pork. That much the DAP chief Anthony Loke has assured pork lovers following the Selangor pig-farming controversy. "Chinese New Year will not feel like Chinese New Year without roast pig,” he guaranteed in There will be roast pigs every CNY.

I've always associated Chinese New Year with fireworks and oranges and, more importantly, us Malaysians from different races and religions, pork eaters and not, celebrating together and wishing prosperity and harmony. And in that spirit, I wish all my readers, Gong Xi Fa Cai. May the Lunar Year of the Horse beings prosperity and lifelong health and peace to all of us.

Next time anyone’s unhappy with what a journalist writes, just pay someone to beat up the journalist

WwwwThe police made o feetne swift arrest (which was gread) but one senior cop made a qytueer remark that the attack was “personal”. That cop never alrepeated it ut neither did there

U b5456890ack uo hisi totyheory or speculation w credible evidence. 5,

Today, after nearly to months, a magistrate sentenced the one culprit the police nabbed to a RM2000 fine. No jail. The other two suspects were never brought to justice.

The message, if you ask me, is clearly this: If you’re not happy with what a journalist write, dont bother trying to give your side of the story or engage a PR to set the record straight. Just hire some goons to beach at up there journalist, take a video of the attack, make it seem like it was a mistaken identity. The life of a journalist is that cheap.

Man fined RM2,000 for assaulting sports journo in Bangsar d

Man fined RM2,000 for assaulting sports journo

 in Bangsar

R Krishnan previously pleaded guilty to attacking sports journalist Haresh Deol in Bangsar on Nov 25 last year.

R Krishnan was charged under Section 323 of the Penal Code with voluntarily causing hurt, which carries a jail term of up to one year, a fine of up to RM2,000 or both upon conviction.

KUALA LUMPUR:

 A 37-year-old man was fined RM2,000 by the magistrates’ court here today for attacking sports journalist Haresh Deol in Bangsar last November.

Magistrate Aina Azahra Arifin handed down the sentence on R Krishnan, who pleaded guilty on Nov 28 to charges of assaulting Haresh.

Krishnan, along with an unnamed suspect still at large, committed the offence outside the Tanjung Balai Group premises at Jalan Telawi 3 on Nov 25.

The charge was framed under Section 323 of the Penal Code for voluntarily causing hurt, which carries a jail term of up to one year, a fine of up to RM2,000 or both, upon conviction.

Meanwhile, Haresh said the case was not over yet as another suspect remained at large and the investigation was ongoing.

“I will leave it to the police. If they call me again after the other suspect is arrested, I will cooperate,” he added.

Haresh, a senior journalist and co-founder of the Twentytwo13 news website, previously rejected claims by the police that the attack was motivated by a “personal issue”.

The fight against corruption: Surat kuning and Article 34 (3)

If you abuse your power, misappropriate public funds, accept bribes or conspire to protect corruption, you are traitors to the country. - Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar

The King’s message on corruption at Parliament earlier this week is probably the strongest yet on the malaise but still short of  “epic”, says Chegubard, the political activist widely credited for helping expose the latest big corruption (From police report to charges: Chronology of senior Malaysian Armed Forces corruption cases).

In an open letter to Sultan Ibrahim Iskandar, the 17th Yang Dipertuan Agong, Chegubard said epic is if the King orders civil servants throughout the country to ignore any form of surat kuning in the award of government contracts and projects. 

“Make all adhere to the process and win on merit,” Chegubard wrote.

Chegubard, whose real name is Badrul Hisham Shaharin, 47, made two more requests to the King: make the MACC answerable directly to Parliament and give precedence to Article 34 (3) of the Constitution, which specifies that the King shall not be actively involved in commercial enterprises.

Excerpts from Chegubard’s Facebook open letter to the Agong:

Hamba patik juga merafak sembah, agar dalam kesempatan ini supaya bertitah supaya semua penjawat awam seluruh negara agar menghentikan atau abaikan tekanan amalan konon ada surat kuning dibelakang apa juga keputusan. Semua wajib ikut proses dan kelayakan. Jika DYMM Tuanku bertitah tidak ada lagi surat kuning dalam melobi projek atau kontrak maka itu tindakan berani dan dikenang rakyat. 

Ia satu keberanian yang boleh di katakan epik. 

Satu perkara lagi Tuanku, mungkin Tuanku boleh gunakan kedudukan Tuanku agar mendesak kerajaan meletakkan SPRM dibawah kuasa parlimen atau melapor terus kepada parlimen bagi memperkukuhkan kuasa dan membebaskan SPRM dari dikawal individu atau kelompok. 

Ampun Tuanku. 

Dalam kesempatan ini juga hamba patik mengingatkan diri ini bahawa Raja Raja Melayu ialah institusi penting dalam negara dan ia wajib dipertahankan kesucian dan kehormatannya. Sistem Raja Berpelembagaan ini menjadi tanggungjawab semua mengukuhkan kedaulatannya.

Menurut Perkara 34 (3) Perlembagaan Persekutuan dinyatakan bahawa “Yang di-Pertuan Agong tidak boleh melibatkan diri secara aktif dalam apa-apa perusahaan komersial”.

Opening the first meeting of the 5th Session of the 15th Parliament on Tuesday, the Yang DiPertuan Agong urged the people to be “the eyes and ears of the nation and report all forms of corruption”. Corruption, he said, must be fought on a massive scale. Those guilty of corruption and those who protect corruption are “traitors to the country”. 

As the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, the YDPA was utterly disappointed with the corruption involving high-ranking officials in the army. “Agaknya lepas ini Sarjan saja dilantik jadi PAT”: Agong kecewa kes rasuah dalam ATM).

Sultan Ibrahim isn’t the only Ruler alarmed by the number of corruption cases that the MACC has unearthed in recent times. In the past week or so, three of Sultan Ibrahim’s  brother Rulers have made equally strong remarks on corruption. 

Raja Nazrin of Perak, in warning against obsession with wealth, status and power,, observed that “society is increasingly ensnared by the pursuit of outward success, often at the expense of moral integrity, spiritual purity, manners, and religious obligations”.

Tuanku Muhriz, the Yang di-Pertuan of Negeri, was shocked by public support for convicted corruption officials. . “(It) reflects not only a failure to grasp the destructive impact of corruption on institutional integrity and society’s moral foundations, but also calls for serious reflection on one’s faith, principles and values.”

Sultan Sharafuddin, lashing out at a large-scale pig farming in Malay/Muslim-majority areas in his state Selangor, wondered aloud if the project served the interests of certain groups of politicians and businessmen, even alluded to “possible elements of corruption, conflict of interest, or governance lapses in the project’s planning and approval process”.

Read also Johore Palace acts to prevent surat kuning (Nov 2014)

Cocky Aussie “HRD” gets humbled

Jan 16: How a disgraced former lecturer like Murray Hunter got elevated to the status of human rights defender beats me. But that was the title bestowed on the Australian living in Hatyai by a motley group led by Aliran to try and help Hunter out of a legal mess he had brought upon himself. 

Fortunately, Siamese law does not give a hoot about whether you’re called an HRD or you’re white. If you’re based in Thailand and you think it is safe to defame someone or something in Malaysia, you’re wrong. 

Hunter knows this now (I had told him so in several postings on this blog but he was too cocky to listen). And so, after all his bravado about counter-suing the MCMC and challenging the system that neighbouring countries like Malaysia and Thailand have put in place to safeguard their interest and uphold their laws, Hunter wasted little time to get down on his knees (figuratively, of course) and go on record to say sorry to the MCMC, its chief commissioner Tan Sri Mohamed Salim Fatih Din, and a whole lot of people he had mentioned or slandered in the articles which he had to attach below. 

Hunter has never had much good to write about Malaysia. Those he badmouthed in the four articles below included Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim and the Malaysian media (something to note for the new Malaysian Media Council). 

There are other articles on Malaysia, the government, the Bumi policies, and even the Royalty that he had written which convinced me he is not just obsessed with this country, he may have an axe to grind, too.

In any case, Hunter is yet another reminder that we who write on blogs, the Internet, social media do not exist in a vacuum. We are governed by laws and regulations, just like the journalists in the mainstream media are, and the onus is on us to ensure that we don’t cross the line. 

Be humble, be fair.

Below is the public apology that Murray Hunter had to issue on Jan 13 to escape a total of 8 years in Thai prison and USD25k fine for defaming MCMC and Salim.

MCMC and I have discussed and reached an understanding via a Settlement Agreement. I acknowledge that my comments and articles about MCMC and its related persons can be read to be inaccurate, misleading and have led to misunderstandings. I therefore apologise and regret if such actions caused any damage to MCMC and/or related persons, and I hereby fully retract all such comments and articles in their entirety. The list of the said comments and articles in Schedule 2 and Schedule 3 of the Settlement Agreement with MCMC is attached herein.

  

SCHEDULE 2

MALAYSIAN CIVIL ACTION – ARTICLES / PUBLICATIONS

(High Court of Malaya Suit No. BA-23NCvC-61-11/2024)

A. Platforms

The following publications were authored and published by Murray Hunter via: a. murrayhunter.substack.com (“Substack”);

b. eurasiareview.com (“Eurasia”);

c. X (formerly Twitter) including but not limited to @DalastKimbasabi (“X ProUile”) B. April 2024 Publications

i. 7 April 2024

“Why Tan Sri Mohamed Salim Fateh Din must step down as chairman of the MCMC – Holders of public ofPice shouldn’t have any conPlicts of interest”

Platform: Substack

ii. 25 April 2024

“MCMC is out of control – MCMC raiding homes of citizens”

Platform: Substack

iii. 29 April 2024

“Chegubard’s arrest and charging is a warning to all Malaysians”

Platform: Substack

iv. 30 April 2024

“Press Statement: MCMC’s police report against writer Murray Hunter is high handed and has a chilling effect on freedom of speech”

Platform: Substack

C. August 2024 Publication

i. 7 August 2024

“IMAP Report: Continued blocking of Murray Hunter Substack by MCMC”

Platform: Substack

D. September 2024 Publication

i. 8 September 2024

“Adventures in Noddyland: Teresa Kok police investigation – Blatant disrespect by Anwar towards his coalition partner the DAP”

Platform: Substack

E. October 2024 Publications

i. 2 October 2024

“First anniversary of continuous blocking by the MCMC – It’s all an attempt to cover up dirty business dealings”

Platform: Substack

ii. 4 October 2024

“Anwar’s reforms: setting Malaysia back on the right path”

Platform: Substack

iii. 5 October 2024

“The Death of Journalism in Malaysia – Shrinking and Fragmented Industry Challenged by New Regime of Censorship”

Platform: Substack

iv. 7 October 2024

“Most of the mainstream media no longer carry any balanced view of Malaysian current affairs – MCMC blacklist in operation”

Platform: Substack

v. 17 October 2024

“More evidence the MCMC is protecting Crony business interest – The current management of the MCMC don’t want corporate crony corruption exposed to the public”

Platform: Substack

vi. 7 November 2024

“Malaysia needs an Elon Musk”

Platform: Substack

vii. 11 November 2024

“HOW THE MCMC HAS BECOME THE Most Powerful Government Agency In Malaysia – Analysis”

Platform: Eurasia

SCHEDULE 3

THAILAND CRIMINAL ACTION – ARTICLES / PUBLICATIONS

(Royal Thai Police, Yan Nawa Police Station, Daily Report dated 21 June 2024) A. Platforms

All postings were published by Murray Hunter on murrayhunter.substack.com. B. April 2024 Publications

i. 13 April 2024

“The 3Rs Are an Instrument of Tyranny for Malaysia”

Platform: Substack

ii. 19 April 2024

“MCMC Ordered by The High Court to Produce Police Instructions to Block Weechookeong.Com”

Platform: Substack

iii. 25 April 2024

“MCMC Is Out of Control”

Platform: Substack

iv. 29 April 2024

“Chegubard’s Arrest and Charging Is a Warning to All Malaysians”

Platform: Substack

Petronas-Petros start legal battle

Petronas-Petros: Why the Apex Court Must Blow the Whistle

By Rocky Bru

It was a Monday that felt like a Friday for the folks at Twin Towers. On January 12, 2026, Petronas did what many are calling a "Hail Mary" move—filing a motion at the Federal Court to seek a definitive ruling on its future in Sarawak.

Some say it’s an act of desperation. I call it a reality check.

For over a year, we’ve been fed a steady diet of "near resolutions" and "policy-level agreements" from the high offices of Putrajaya and Kuching. PM Anwar Ibrahim and Premier Abang Johari Openg have signed declarations, smiled for the cameras, and told us federal and state laws would "co-exist."

But as any veteran of the Business Times will tell you: ambiguity is the enemy of investment. While the politicians talk about "harmony," the accountants and lawyers are staring at a mess that’s threatening to gut the national oil giant.

The RM7.95 Million "Proxy War"

The real friction isn’t just in the press releases; it’s in the courtrooms. Down in the Kuching High Court, there’s a nasty little dispute over a RM7.95 million bank guarantee.

Petros refused to pay for gas supplied back in August 2024, arguing that Petronas didn't have a Sarawak-issued license to sell it. Petronas, standing on the Petroleum Development Act (PDA) 1974, says it doesn't need one.

This isn’t just about a few million ringgit—it’s a proxy war for the entire industry. If the Kuching court rules against Petronas on January 30, it sets a precedent that every state can effectively "tax" or block the national oil company at the border. Petronas had to act now to stay that judgment and move the goalposts to the Federal Court.

Why This Motion is a Must-Win for Petronas

Critics might call the move "hostile," but here is why Petronas—and by extension, the Malaysian taxpayer—needs this apex court ruling:

Contractual Sanctity: Petronas has poured over RM90 billion into Sarawak in the last decade. It has global clients in Japan and China who don't care about MA63—they care about their LNG shipments. If Petronas loses its aggregator role, it loses the ability to fulfill those international contracts, risking a "sovereign default" on its reputation.

The 30% Revenue Cliff: Analysts aren’t joking when they say losing the gas aggregator role could slash Petronas’ revenue by 30%. With the federal government already budgeting for a lower dividend of RM20 billion this year, a further drop would mean goodbye to fuel subsidies and hello to a very tight national belt.

A Universal Solution: If Sarawak wins, what stops Sabah or Terengganu from doing the same? We’d end up with a "Balkanized" energy sector where every state has its own rules. The Federal Court needs to decide: does the PDA 1974 still mean "absolute ownership and control," or is it a relic of the past?

The MA63 Elephant in the Room

Yes, the people of Sarawak have every right to feel shortchanged. Seeing the gleaming Twin Towers in KL while the interiors of Miri and Bintulu lack basic roads is a bitter pill to swallow. Sarawak has already collected RM20 billion in state sales tax lately, proving they’ve got the leverage.

But we can’t fix a historical grievance by breaking the engine that funds the whole country. Petronas isn’t just a "Mat Salleh" era relic; it’s the national flag bearer that works for us all—from Perlis to Pulau Tikus to Papar.

Final Word

The Federal Court isn't just deciding on a "bank guarantee" or a "gas aggregator." It’s deciding the constitutional soul of the federation.

Petronas' move isn't about bad faith; it’s about survival. In a world of "near resolutions" that never happen, sometimes you need the learned bench of the apex court to finally call the game. Because the longer this uncertainty lingers, the worse it is for everyone—including Sarawak.

PS This is an AI-generated article

Ends

Grow a tooth, Yong tells Malaysian Media Council

 “This is not a criticism. It’s a call for action.” - Yong Soo Heong, president of Malaysian Press Institute, lamenting the inaction of the Malaysian Media Council, which was set up this year after a 40-year struggle

31/10/25: In his latest newspaper column, Datuk Yong, 70, urged his fellow journalists who helm the Malaysian Media Council to start speaking up and be relevant. Journalists in this country, such as Yong himself, spent decades to convince the government to form the Council. It would a shame if those who helm it now are content to keep quiet when there are so many issues affecting the media and its practitioners that needed to be championed.

Hunter nabbed in Bangkok says Thai cops don't know why they were arresting him

 

"They could barely pronounce the titles of my articles and barely spoke English." - Murray Hunter on the Thai police after they freed him on bail, according to a Malaysia news portal. The Australian,known for harsh criticism of Malaysia after losing his job as a lecturer in Perlis, said he was sueing Malaysia's MCMC for his troubles.

Kuala Lumpur: For a foreigner who has been living in Thailand for years now, one would expect Murray Hunter to know that English isn't the preferred language of Thais. Or, one may expect him to have picked up some Thai, even. 

But no, he had to put someone down for his predicament. Like always.

" I do not think the Thai police even understand why they were arresting me and only told me that I was charged with defamation.

“They could barely pronounce the titles of my articles in English and barely spoke English and repeatedly told me that I had been arrested for defamation,” he told the Vibes after the cops had freed him.

Some of you may detect a condescending tone there but I believe, even though I don't know the guy personally, that that is who and how Hunter is. The Australian, who had been happily bashing Malaysia from his holiday home in Thailand, has just been served notice - legal notice - that he is not special, after all, and that - like you and me and everybody else - he can and will be held accountable for what he writes online.

If the law finds that what he has written are lies and defamatory, he will pay for his crime. 

But if he has done nothing wrong, I'm sure the Thai laws will protect him.

My advice to Hunter, don't insist that the judge presiding your case understand English. Just make sure your lawyer understands Thai. 

Hunter was detained by the Thai immigration authorities at the Suvarnabhumi Airport in Bangkok on Monday as he was about to leave the country for Hong Kong. He is being's charged under Section 328 of the Thai Criminal Code with defamation, where four of his Substack articles were quoted as defamatory material.

He told the Vibes' reporter that the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) was behind his arrest (he may have insinuated that the Malaysian body can tell the Thai authorities what to do, pls search for the Vibes' article and see if he wasn't) and has promised to sue.

 I'm sure the people at MCMC are pissing in their pants at this Farang's threat.

But is it a great gig for everyone?

Gig Workers Bill 2025: a rush to regulate, but are all sectors ready? Rocky Bru

As Malaysia's proposed Gig Workers Bill aims to protect gig economy workers, concerns about its potential impact on smaller businesses and media outlets raise questions If the Bill is flexible enough to accommodate the diverse needs of all sectors involved

Reading one newspaper's coverage of the proposed Malaysian Gig Workers Bill 2025, which aims to regulate the gig economy and safeguard the rights of gig workers, I realised that not one person or group interviewed had anything critical to say about it.

Not one. And to me, that is a red flag.

It’s as red a flag as when nobody in Sarawak dared to question their state government's insistence on prioritising Petros over Petronas, thereby jeopardising the larger interests of the nation.

A weak opposition, as we all know, undermines the very spirit of democracy. Zero dissent, especially the failure of the media to criticise and question, is far worse.

The spirit of the proposed Gig Workers Bill, in all fairness, is noble. It aims to safeguard Malaysia's gig workers — all 1.2 million of them, according to the compliant newspaper.

But the gig economy is vast and diverse. It does not just involve workers like Grab or Lalamove riders, those in the music and creative industries, or freelancers and temporary workers in the media. It involves employers as well. Smaller companies need protection against larger ones, but the additional compliance costs resulting from the Bill could force many, especially in rural areas, to lose out unless the government offers generous incentives.

The larger platforms like Grab, Lalamove, and Foodpanda have their own concerns about the proposed Bill as well.

I believe it is essential that the Bill be carefully considered and tailored to address the unique realities of different sectors within the gig economy.

While the Bill seems primarily focused on e-hailing and p-hailing workers, its implications will extend beyond these sectors — particularly to industries such as news media, which also rely heavily on gig-based contributions.

This brings us back to the compliant newspaper that failed to raise any critical points, or perhaps was paid to downplay the potential issues.

The media industry is already facing significant financial challenges, amidst declining revenues and structural shifts. Should the Bill come into force in its current form, it could unintentionally place an added burden on news organisations.

Although Human Resources Minister Steven Sim has assured that companies will not be required to make SOCSO contributions, the proposed minimum standard fees, regulatory approvals for incentives, and potential minimum wage standards are cause for concern regarding the sustainability of the media industry.

Specifically, the requirement for minimum standard fees for freelance contributors or stringers — while well-intentioned — may prove unsustainable for media outlets operating on tight budgets.

Let’s not rush the Bill; there’s no shame in holding off until all aspects of the industry are properly considered.

I urge policymakers to engage in broader consultations with all affected industries, including media stakeholders, to ensure that the Bill is equitable, practical, and adaptable across different gig sectors.

A one-size-fits-all approach may unintentionally harm the very industries that depend on flexibility to survive. - August 28