Suing WSJ a bad public relations move, say lawyers

Suing WSJ a bad public relations move, say lawyers
BY V. ANBALAGAN, ASSISTANT NEWS EDITOR



The article in the Wall Street Journal alleging funds from 1MDB funnelled into accounts belonging to Datuk Seri Najib Razak. The prime minister will reportedly – WSJ screenshot, July 4, 2015.

The article in the Wall Street Journal alleging funds from 1MDB funnelled into accounts belonging to Datuk Seri Najib Razak. The prime minister will reportedly – WSJ screenshot, July 4, 2015.


Datuk Seri Najib Razak should proceed with caution following the decision to sue the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) for publishing a defamatory article claiming that billions were channelled into the prime minister’s personal accounts, civil lawyers said.
They said it would not be wise of the PM's ministers and his public relations consultants to demonise any media organisation to win in the "court of public opinion".

They said Najib must first attempt to get his side of the issue published in the reputable newspaper or demand a retraction and public apology if the report was untrue, before seeking legal redress.


Lawyer Ang Hean Leng said Malaysian leaders like Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah had won suits against foreign publications for injuring his reputation in the Bumiputera Malaysia Finance Limited (BMF) scandal.
"Najib, too, could file a suit in Kuala Lumpur or the United States," he said.

However, should the prime minister file a suit outside Malaysia, he must submit to foreign jurisdiction.

Ang was commenting on investigations into debt-ridden 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) which have allegedly uncovered billions of ringgit channelled to the personal accounts of the prime minister as published by the WSJ and whistle-blower site, Sarawak Report.

Both quoted from documents from the 1MDB probe that is being carried out by the Malaysian government, with Sarawak Report claiming that the Attorney-General was also aware of the information.

The documents show that US$700 million (RM2.67 billion) was moved among government agencies, banks and entities linked to 1MDB and finally ending up in the prime minister's personal accounts in five separate deposits, WSJ said.

It said that the largest transactions were deposits of US$620 million and another one for US$61 million in March 2013, two months before the 13th general election.

However, Najib has denied using public funds in a Facebook posting. Today, a Malay daily reported that he would take legal action against WSJ.

Ang, however, said the media could use justification, fair reporting and qualified privilege as defences against defamation suits.

"The celebrated British case of Reynolds v Times Newspaper Ltd, which is also adopted by Malaysian courts, established principles relating to responsible journalism and offer protection to publishers from liability.”

He said the allegations were of great public interest case and the media could carry such news but they must act responsibly.

Ang said Najib could file his action in Kuala Lumpur because his reputation was tarnished more in Malaysia than anywhere else.

"Moreover, the report was published through the Internet and downloaded in Malaysia," he said, adding that a higher amount of damages could be awarded if he was successful in proving his case.

Lawyer S. N. Nair said as a politician, Najib's better option was to clarify the report with WSJ.

"I am sure the publisher will carry the prime minister's version in print or in its news portal in line with the principle of fair play.”

Nair said Najib could ask for a retraction of the report if it was false and demand a public apology.

“But even if the publisher makes an expression of regret, nothing stops Najib from filing a suit. Only that the damages awarded will be lower because the defendant has admitted to an error without delay," he said.

Lawyers for Liberty executive director Eric Paulsen, however, said it was pointless for Najib to resort to a suit because an explanation would suffice.

"Najib should use all medial channels, including the WSJ to convince the public that he has nothing to hide," he said.

Paulsen said it was a futile exercise to attack the media, especially reputable organisations as it was bad public relations.

"The report came out in WSJ and not a blog whose credibility and professionalism could be questioned.”

Paulsen said politicians like US president Barack Obama and British Prime Minister David Cameron were never in the business of suing the media for publishing public interest issues.

"At the end of the day, politicians live or fall based on public opinion about them. So it is better to engage the media." – July 4, 2015.