The Malaysian Insight

THE Kuala Lumpur High Court today ruled that elements of defamation were proven in Terengganu’s Sultanah Nur Zahirah suit against Clare Rewcastle Brown over claims in her book, The Sarawak Report: The Inside Story of the 1MDB Expose, published in September last year.

Justice Ahmad Zaidi Ibrahim said Rewcastle Brown must now turn up in court to defend herself, adding that she will be cross-examined by the plaintiff.

The other two defendants named in the suit – Gerakbudaya Enterprise publisher Chong Ton Sin and printing company Vinlin Press Sdn Bhd – must also appear in court to fight the defamation claims.

As for the sultanah, Ahmad ruled she did not have to appear in court as she had proven she had been defamed.

Today’s ruling was on the sultanah’s application filed on May 13 under Order 14A of the Rules of Court 2012 to partly dispose of a major part of the trial.

Case management for further trial dates has been set for January 20.

“We have always maintained that she never had a role. The second publication of the book is a clear indication of that,” the sultanah’s lawyer, Mohd Haaziq Pillay Abdullah, said after today’s proceedings.

“The evidence is quite clear. Even a child reading it would know that.”

Assisting Haaziq today was lawyer Denzel Tan Jiin Hock while lawyer Khalis Isma Alif Ismail represented all three defendants. He did not speak to the press.

Rewcastle Brown’s Malaysian legal team is led by lawyer Americk Sidhu, who was not present in court today.

On November 21, last year, Zahirah had sued Rewcastle Brown for claiming that she had conspired with businessman Low Taek Jho in the multi-billion-dollar 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) scandal.

The sultanah had denied meeting Low or supporting him in securing an advisory role at Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA) or 1MDB. She had also denied being involved in either organisation and interfering in government affairs.

The sultanah is claiming general damages of RM100 million from each defendant.

Her suit also sought for Chong to withdraw the book and for Vinlin to stop printing the book.

The sultanah rejected offers of settlement from the parties, saying they failed to meet the criteria for an unconditional apology.

The suit focuses on one paragraph on Page 3 of the book, which alleged that Low had the sultanah’s support to obtain an official advisory position in 1MDB.

1MDB was formerly known as TIA before being renamed in 2009 under former prime minister Najib Razak’s administration. 

Earlier, Ahmad said the four questions on the elements of defamation proven were: whether the statement was referring to the plaintiff; whether the statement was published and circulated by third parties; whether the statement was defamatory; and, whether the statement remains defamatory when read with pages 4, 5, and 8 in the book, as disputed by the defendants.  

The excerpt read:

“In April he (Low) had netted himself an official advisory role at the newly set-up sovereign wealth fund designed to invest the oil revenues from the Malaysian State of Terengganu (since elections in this oil state had just been won by the opposition, BN was ruthlessly looking for ways to divert its revenues into a federally controlled entity).

“Jho (Low) was also friendly with a key player in Terengganu, the wife of the sultan, whose acquiescence was needed to set up the fund and he later cited her support as having been crucial to his obtaining the advisory position. This was the fund that would shortly be converted into the scandalous entity known as 1MDB…”

Rewcastle Brown’s book was published on September 8, 2018, a fortnight before The Wall Street Journal journalists Tom Wright and Bradley Hope released Billion Dollar Whale, another book on the 1MDB scandal.

In the second edition of her book published soon after, the words the “sultan’s wife” was changed to the “sultan’s sister”.

Ahmad ruled today that the elements of defamation were clear, whether or not it was read with other pages of the book.

On the meanings of the words, which were also contested by the defendants, Ahmad said: “I believe you don’t need an expert to read and understand the meaning. Because what was written was meant by the author.”

“In the plain reading of this, the person who was referred to was Jho Low and the wife of the sultan was the plaintiff. The purpose of such writing was for the masses, not experts in the English language. It was plain and obvious.”

Ahmad said the burden has “shifted to the defendants”.

“The court agrees with the lawyers’ argument that there is no need for the plaintiff to be present to give her testimony,” he said.

In a statement posted on the Sarawak Report website last year, Rewcastle Brown had apologised to the sultanah if she “has been upset by any misinterpretations of our meaning”.

The sultanah had refused to accept the author’s apology and instead, through her lawyer, said she would donate all the money awarded to her by the court to charity should she win her case. – December 13, 2019.