Wednesday, January 31, 2007

Blog on Defamation Theory

Since the events of recent had parlayed the factual situation that connote the nation are and will be moving towards a new paradigm shift, a shift that attempts to constraint the bloggers' world, a new paradigm where the media moguls had made the 5th Estate the target of destruction, I felt it is necessary that we understand the law on Defamation, that is, Libel.

I tried to get Malik Imtiaz to write on his blog on the subject matter based on Malaysian case law, but he did not respond. So, I started one myself, Law of Defamation and another on Malaysian Cases on Defamation and Common Law Cases on Defamation.

I do not have the resources and permissions to the various online law journals such as MLJ and CLJ. I had greatly constraint from acquiring those cases, particularly Malaysian cases. I have less problem with Common Law cases. So I hope fellow experts, law students and lecturers and lawyers will lent a hand to me by providing articles relating to this subject matter.

What I wanted was to ensure that the bloggers world are not ignorant of the rights and also the obligations relating to a duty of care when they write and post articles of their own opinion. This include me, who often write a bit carefree as if the nation has a clear convention that permits freedom of expression within the context and framework enshrined in the United Nation charter.

I do not preach an absolute freedom, so long as it is within the context that:

"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority...

The current hypothesi situation is is largely brought about by the fact that almost all the local newsprints are either owned or controlled by political parties with the presumption that they would only permit prints that do not reveal their own wrongdoings and inefficiencies. Equally, as a commercial need, they had to weaken their competitors and one of the most threatening competitor for traditional newsprints are the bloggers-media world. Added to in is the axiomatic truth known to readers that there exist, in totality, coterie and cronies within certain organization who have the power and control, to spin and doctor informations to suit certain people and circumstance.

At such, the new 5th Estate, the blogsphere blossoms to become the new alternative, or rather, the preferred source of information distribution and dissemination. More effective and insidiously growing is the fact of unity and community building. The bloggers world are congregating and consolidating and gaining strength by uniting. Unknowingly, they are adopting the doctrine of "UMMAH-ism" and that doctrine is the fundamental of the strength and influence as can be seen in the days of the Khalifas and the Ottoman empires.

Modern conceptions of democracy require that the role the new paradigm, the blogsphere, which now serves as the new media outlet for informing the public of matters of controversy be more readily recognized than has been the case in the past.

The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subjected to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society...for the protection of the reputation or rights of others..."

"The courts should be slow to conclude that a publication was not in the public interest and therefore, the public had no right to know, especially when the information is in the field of political discussion. Any lingering doubts should be resolved in favour of publications."

- This statement was made by Lord Nicholls in Reynolds vs Times Newspaper Ltd (1999) House of Lords.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

one way to enshrine your concept of new paradigm shift is to encourage the public to stop support star newspaper or pro govt papers. Please don't get me wrong, i support the govt. but not on one sided scale.

Once readership dropped to 30% or more, i believe this scenario will drive the editors to scream for more freedom on media expression. Hypothetically speaking, a country can't have few bankrupt newspaper publishing houses.

Instead of going to the streets to riot and showing anger, it won't help in Malaysia because the ISA will come in to catch the leader. Furthermore, going riot put Malaysia on the wrong side of world map.

Therefore, if we all agree to stop supporting the pro-govt newspapers in a silent protest manner, there is nothing to lose because not only we save RM 1.20 a day or RM 438 a month, we probably could change the course of our nationalism very quickly.

For example, if star and utusan is losing 50% of their readership for 3 to 9 months, very quickly we will see alot of changes. Advertisement will drop, retailers and business enterprises will not be happy of course. However, do not forget most of us spend more time reading more on the internet than on the newspapers. Forget about those retirees who prefer to read in coffee shop and at home, there are not our future builders so their vote for my proposed silent protest must not be accounted for but lets not forget about their wisdom.

Furthermore, the growing interest of blogsphere also proves that people want to hear the other side of news we receive everyday.

On the contrary, I see alot of bloggers are commenting on the govt. based on reports made by the star papers! Govt will always say you bloggers are baseless because we make comments based on what we read from the paper.

Seriously speaking, I have stopped reading star paper. There is nothing in it anymore except alot of political propaganda.

- Death Star

Anonymous said...

I sincerely thank you for writing the defamation theory to educate the public, this includes me.

I would read star again if they are being matured and responsible of what they are suppose to do - publishing two sides of a story for the public to judge. One sided story such as the star or the harakah are too stereotyping and reading too much of them make me more stupid everyday.

Honestly, I have nothing to against the newsprints. They are not cowards if the Newsprint Act is removed. So, in order to remove the Act, lets not go to the streets to show our anger or hold riot or strike to put us in shame in world news. Lets change them by stop supporting the newsprint by not paying RM 1.20 a day to them.

Anonymous said...

As a person who resides out of the country, I read both, the politically controlled news sources and also blogs. To me, blogs are nothing more than mere perspectives from laymen, some related and some unrelated 'officially' to the official print/telecast media.

Defamation/libel actions would only be 'effective' in so far as damage is done. Here, is there 'real' damage where income or the prospect of earning is lost? If yes, how can one quantify that? If you are not able to quantify that, is there real threat for unrest in the country simply because one/two individuals put forward ideas/evidence of misconduct/irresponsible acts of certain persons/parties? Can the remedies either injunction or financial compensation be sufficient? Or complete alteration/curb of freedom of thoughts & speech necessary?

In my opinion, the act of putting forward truth/disclosing information which would normally be hidden, for the benefit of the wider society, should not be construed as defamation/libel. Also, we are allowed to question. If blogs are going to be subjected by the law to conform to rules and regulations of the general media at large, then all media sources must be subjected to the same law and standards. Which should be benchmarked against the 'truth' (responsible journalism) rather than political endeavours/personal egoism.

Afterall, every government needs to have oppositions, in order to keep its mechanics well-oiled, for the best of the nation. All media, are checklist/mirrors, even critical machines for government/political parties to understand, how the voters/society which they promised to serve, functions and thinks. How the voters react to their manouvres, what benefits the nation?

Lord Nicholls may be laisser faire with his conclusion which may only apply to the publications in a country where everyone is allowed to laugh at themselves.

Can we laugh at ourselves?

NvdV
p.s Thanks for the nice piece of work, putting together the sources...

Maverick SM said...

Nina,

is it true that those who reside outside and observed from the outside sees things better of the inside?

Yours words are motivating and insightful.

The other Anonymous - there are just too many of you; would you consider using a moniker or pseudonym when posting or at the sign-off at your comments?

Anonymous said...

Magnetic therapy is a form of therapy charms thomas sabo that has been used for many years for a variety of different purposes, including
thomas sabo bracelets pain relief, prevention of aging and the relief of a range of symptoms from a range of thomas bracelets ailments. The problems that the therapy helped to alleviate are still present in the modern world, sabo bracelet therefore it is logical that the method used to ease these problems before can still be used today. There are many products available today which can perform this thomas sabo bracelets uk magnetic therapy. Each group of products has a different design and can help with diverse problems, normally in the area around the place where the product is worn. buy thomas sabo bracelet Magnetic therapy has general benefits that most products will provide you with in addition to the specialized benefits that are received from the therapy.