Chief Judge of Malaya Azahar Mohamed, who chaired a three-member bench, said Rafizi had successfully raised the defence of fair comment to defeat the suit.

“He is entitled to express freely on a matter of public interest,” said Azahar, who delivered the unanimous judgment today.

Watch the video here.

The other members of the bench were Zaleha Yusof and Zabariah Mohd Yusof.

Azahar said Rafizi, a PKR vice-president, had also relied on certain undisputed bank documents to make an honest opinion about NFC and Salleh.

“There was also no malice on the part of the respondent (Rafizi) and he was entitled to make a fair comment,” he said, adding that Rafizi could not be held liable.

Rafizi, who was represented by Razlan Hadri Zulkifli and Ranjit Singh, was also awarded RM70,000 in costs.

Lawyer Shafee Abdullah represented NFCorp and Salleh.

Salleh filed the defamation suit against Rafizi in 2013, after the then MP alleged that he and NFCorp had used a RM71 million government loan as collateral to purchase properties at KL Eco City.

In 2016, the High Court ordered Rafizi to pay RM150,000 in damages, after holding him liable for defaming Salleh.

The Court of Appeal, however, granted Rafizi’s appeal and set aside the lower court’s ruling. It ordered the RM150,000 that was paid to Salleh to be refunded and also awarded costs of RM110,000 to Rafizi.

Azahar said today the High Court judge found that the loan given by Public Bank had been withdrawn by the time Rafizi made the impugned statement.

He said the High Court concluded that the facts relied on by Rafizi were inaccurate.

“In my view, the High Court failed to appreciate that the withdrawal of the loan confirmed that such a loan had been granted despite the lack of solid savings in the bank,” he said.

He said financial standing would be an important factor for any customer to seek a loan from a bank.

“Therefore, a reader will draw the inference that the RM71.3 million deposit plays a part in the bank’s initial loan to purchase eight units of property,” he said.

Azahar said that in his view, based on the “basic facts”, Rafizi’s statements were opinions and inferences.

He said the NFC project was raised in the Auditor-General’s Report in 2011 where its failures and weaknesses were highlighted as public funds were involved.

“It attracted public attention on grounds of accountability, transparency and good governance of all those involved in managing public funds.”

He also said it received wide media coverage and was debated in Parliament.

The chief judge said Rafizi’s allegation that public funds were abused as leverage for getting the loan would also be an honest opinion and inference a fair-minded person would have come to in the present circumstances.

“The respondent was not motivated by malice to make the impugned statement as he believed the allegations were true and made in the performance of his public duty,” he said.

We are live on Telegram, subscribe here for breaking news and the latest announcements.