Judge Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal said they have every right to commence such action when defamatory publications identify them in government in their attacks rather than as blanket critics of public policies.
“No distinction is to be drawn between a public officer and being defamed for a conduct in his official and personal capacity,” he said in his summary judgment.
Harmindar and Judge Nallini Pathmanathan, who were in the majority, allowed former Penang chief minister Lim Guan Eng’s appeal against Malay rights group Perkasa for labelling him a traitor in allegedly revealing national secrets to the Singapore government.
Judge Abdul Rahman Sebli dissented.
Harmindar also cautioned that there needs to be a balance in the protection of free speech and one’s reputation.
“It is an anathema to a modern constitutional democracy to permit elected government authority to commence action against citizens who placed them in power,” he said.
He said concepts like honour, dignity, good name, integrity and character abound in good court judgments to reflect why individuals’ reputations need protection.
Public officials, just like ordinary citizens, were capable of being defamed and both share the right to dignity and reputation, he said.
He said it would be discriminatory that the reputation of public officials that affected their official functions was singled out for adverse treatment.
Without the protection, Harmindar said, they would be powerless to defend themselves against attacks by the media and others who were in positions of power.
“It is my judgment that the public official must enjoy the same rights as other citizens and be allowed to sue for damages for defamation in any individual capacity whether in relation to personal or public matters,” he said.
He said the Court of Appeal, in reversing the original High Court ruling, was plainly in error when it decided that public officials were excluded in the public interest from filing a defamation suit in their official capacity.
Today’s ruling restored the findings of the High Court which had ordered Perkasa and its president, Ibrahim Ali, to pay RM150,000 in damages to Lim.
The New Straits Times and Utusan Melayu were also found liable by the High Court and each paid RM200,0000 but did not appeal.
All the defendants were sued after the statement was published on Perkasa’s website which implied that Lim was endangering national security by exposing the country’s secrets to Singapore.