A Selwam, the TV3 northern region correspondent, said the onus was on Anwar to contact the media to state his response.

The reporter said this in his witness’ statement in response to Anwar’s defamation suit against former Permatang Pauh Barisan Nasional candidate Mazlan Ismail , Sistem Televisyen Malaysia Bhd and Utusan Melayu (M) Bhd for publishing the defamatory words.

Mazlan had held a press conference on Aug 2, 2013, and uttered the remarks which were aired by the television station that same night.

Malay daily Utusan Malaysia published Mazlan’s statement the following day.

During the press conference, Mazlan also produced about 6,000 copies of poison pen letters, which he (Mazlan) claimed to have received, to the media.

He said the letters were sent to him through the post and some were even placed in packages in front of his house.

Selwam said after the press conference, he prepared a news script and recording of the event which he submitted to TV3 headquarters in Petaling Jaya via an online system.

It was then picked up for vetting before being incorporated into the Buletin Utama news programme, he said.

Selwam said once Anwar or any other party had seen the report, they were at liberty to contact TV3 or the media to state their comments .

“This particular news report is only to cover the press conference called by the first defendant (Mazlan).

“Given the tone, style and overall manner of the report, I did not feel the need to obtain any verification from the plaintiff (Anwar) or any other party at the time the report was aired,” he added.

The witness said TV3 had practised responsible journalism every step of the way from preparation of the report up to the point of the broadcast in the Buletin Utama.

He said the issue was of public interest as it involved the administration of justice and that he was duty bound to share the news with its viewers who had the right to receive such information.

He said TV3 had no malice in publishing Mazlan’s press conference although Anwar was a prominent politician in Malaysia.

“TV3 was merely carrying out its public duties as a responsible organisation. There is no ill will in publishing the news report,” he added.

Cross-examined by Sangeet Kaur, who is appearing for Anwar, Selwam said it was common for TV3 to publish news reports without verifying the information.

“In this case, truth is not a consideration in my reporting,” Selwam, said, adding he just recorded the event.

He was also aware there was no police report lodged or investigations carried out over the allegation.

He disagreed with Sangeet’s suggestion that TV3 published unreliable information.

Selwam said he did not ask Mazlan whether he (Mazlan) would lodge a police report or refer the matter to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission for investigation.

He said TV3 not only relied on the information provided by Mazlan but the station had also carried extensive research on the allegation.

The suit came about when Mazlan, whom Anwar defeated for the Permatang Pauh seat in the 2013 general election, claimed to have received the letters alleging that Anwar had paid Karpal more than RM50 million since 2008 as legal fees and bribes to judges and prosecutors.

At the time the statement was made, Anwar said, he was the opposition leader and Permatang Pauh MP, and the allegation put him in low esteem in the eyes of the public.

Anwar is currently serving a five-year jail term for sodomy since Feb 10, 2015. This was after the Federal Court upheld his conviction and sentence by the Court of Appeal.

Karpal, who was Anwar’s lead counsel in the sexual misconduct case, was killed in a car accident on April 17, 2014.

Anwar is seeking an unspecified amount in damages, costs and other relief deemed fit by the court.

He said the statement by the defendants implied that he was a politician who lacked integrity, was of low morals and was unfit to hold public office as he offered bribes.

The hearing before Judicial Commissioner Faizah Jamaludin was adjourned to May 2.