Rais dakwa tindakan saman Malaysiakini hak asasi Najib
KUALA LUMPUR: Tindakan Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak memfailkan saman fitnah terhadap portal berita Malaysiakini dan dua pengarangnya adalah satu langkah yang dituntut dalam menjamin hak asasi manusia presiden Umno itu, kata Tan Sri Dr Rais Yatim.
Penasihat Kerajaan dalam Hal Ehwal Sosial dan Kebudayaan itu berkata sebagai seorang yang bermaruah dan merasakan dirinya telah dimalukan dengan sangkaan jahat, Najib, yang juga perdana menteri, tentu sekali mahu namanya dan nama partinya dibersihkan.
Venue (tempat) terbaik dan paling sesuai untuk berbuat demikian ialah mahkamah, katanya dalam kenyataan di sini semalam.
"Mengambil tindakan mahkamah lantaran teraniaya, difitnah, ditipu dan sebagainya adalah satu langkah yang dituntut di sisi hak asasi manusia," tegas Rais.
Beliau mengulas kenyataan Presiden Majlis Peguam Christopher Leong semalam yang menggesa Najib dan Umno membatalkan saman fitnah itu.
Rais berkata kenyataan itu secara jelas menunjukkan badan berkenaan sudah turun padang bermain politik, dan seolah-olah tidak lagi mengambil kira hak asasi manusia seseorang yang mahu mendapatkan keadilan di mahkamah.
"Apakah Majlis Peguam sudah lupa undang-undang yang mereka sendiri dakwa hendak ditegakkan? Kini terbukti peranannya sebagai pengamal politik murahan," katanya.
Pada 30 Mei, Najib selaku presiden Umno dan Setiausaha Kerja Umno Datuk Ab Rauf Yusoh memfailkan saman fitnah terhadap syarikat, ketua pengarang dan ketua editor laman web portal Malaysiakini menerusi Tetuan Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak di pejabat pendaftar Mahkamah Tinggi di sini berhubung penerbitan dua artikel bulan lepas.
Najib dan Ab Rauf (bagi pihak Umno) menamakan syarikat Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd, Ketua Pengarang Steven Gan dan Ketua Editor Fathi Aris Omar sebagai defendan pertama hingga ketiga.
Dalam pernyataan tuntutan, Najib dan Ab Rauf mendakwa ketiga-tiga defendan telah melapor, mengeluar dan membenarkan penerbitan dua artikel berasingan bertajuk 'A case of the PM reaping what he sows' dan 'How much will Najib spend to keep Terengganu?'.
Kedua-dua artikel itu didakwa diterbitkan pada 14 Mei lalu. - Bernama
Sumber HD - 8-6-2014
Defamation suit by PM no answer to public misgivings, criticisms
The Malaysian Bar views with concern the suit filed by the United Malays National Organisation (“UMNO”) and Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak against an online news portal and its editors for alleged defamation. The defendants in the suit are Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd, Editor-in-Chief Steven Gan and Chief Editor Fathi Aris Omar. The alleged defamation is with respect to the publication by the defendants of two separate compilations of comments by members of the public.
This is the first time a Malaysian Prime Minister has issued suit against members of the news media for purported defamation. The Prime Minister is in effect suing members of the news media for the views and comments of the public to whom the Prime Minister is accountable and answerable. This sets a bad precedent and sends the wrong message.
Every public official is accountable to the people who have entrusted him or her with a position of public office and responsibility. The duties of good governance and accountability should demand the public official be able to endure the full brunt of free speech.
Public officials — especially those holding high public office — and political parties should not resort to lawsuits for defamation as an answer to criticism or comment, whether or not such criticism or comment is unfounded and untrue. They should accept such adverse comments, no matter how vitriolic, obnoxious or untrue, as natural hazards of putting themselves forth into public political life, so long as it does not affect the person in his or her private sphere.
The Prime Minister should not use civil defamation action against criticism, whether substantiated or otherwise. The Prime Minister should have taken the opportunity to engage in public explanation, debate, education, counter-arguments and vindication by conduct in answer to untruths and as the means of
redressing any alleged injury to reputation.
If the comments and issues complained of are sufficiently important for correction, the Prime Minister should reply in the public arena, and let the measure of public opinion be the judge of the truth. Public funds and resources should not to be used or expended on defamation suits with respect to matters and comments made in relation to his public office.
In this regard, the approach of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the leading case of New York Times Co v Sullivan, where the defamation suit by an elected politician was dismissed as being contrary to public interest, set out with approval the following:
Cases which impose liability for erroneous reports of the political conduct of officials reflect the obsolete doctrine that the governed must not criticize their governors…The interest of the public here outweighs the interest of appellant or any other individual. The protection of the public requires not merely discussion, but information. …Whatever is added to the field of libel is taken from the field of free debate.
The Privy Council in Hector v AG of Antigua and Barbuda expressed sentiments, which we in Malaysia should heed, namely:
In a free democratic society it is almost too obvious to need stating that those who hold office in government and who are responsible for public administration must always be open to criticism. Any attempt to stifle or fetter such criticism amounts to political censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind.
We urge the Prime Minister and his political party to withdraw their defamation suit against Mkini and its editors. The Prime Minister should instead take the opportunity to reply or rebut any adverse or incorrect comments made by members of the public.
Sumber HD - 7-6-2014
Defamation suit by PM no answer to public misgivings, criticisms
The Malaysian Bar views with concern the suit filed by the United Malays National Organisation (“UMNO”) and Prime Minister Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib Tun Abdul Razak against an online news portal and its editors for alleged defamation. The defendants in the suit are Mkini Dotcom Sdn Bhd, Editor-in-Chief Steven Gan and Chief Editor Fathi Aris Omar. The alleged defamation is with respect to the publication by the defendants of two separate compilations of comments by members of the public.
This is the first time a Malaysian Prime Minister has issued suit against members of the news media for purported defamation. The Prime Minister is in effect suing members of the news media for the views and comments of the public to whom the Prime Minister is accountable and answerable. This sets a bad precedent and sends the wrong message.
Every public official is accountable to the people who have entrusted him or her with a position of public office and responsibility. The duties of good governance and accountability should demand the public official be able to endure the full brunt of free speech.
Public officials — especially those holding high public office — and political parties should not resort to lawsuits for defamation as an answer to criticism or comment, whether or not such criticism or comment is unfounded and untrue. They should accept such adverse comments, no matter how vitriolic, obnoxious or untrue, as natural hazards of putting themselves forth into public political life, so long as it does not affect the person in his or her private sphere.
The Prime Minister should not use civil defamation action against criticism, whether substantiated or otherwise. The Prime Minister should have taken the opportunity to engage in public explanation, debate, education, counter-arguments and vindication by conduct in answer to untruths and as the means of redressing any alleged injury to reputation.
If the comments and issues complained of are sufficiently important for correction, the Prime Minister should reply in the public arena, and let the measure of public opinion be the judge of the truth. Public funds and resources should not to be used or expended on defamation suits with respect to matters and comments made in relation to his public office.
In this regard, the approach of the Supreme Court of the United States of America in the leading case of New York Times Co v Sullivan, where the defamation suit by an elected politician was dismissed as being contrary to public interest, set out with approval the following:
Cases which impose liability for erroneous reports of the political conduct of officials reflect the obsolete doctrine that the governed must not criticize their governors…The interest of the public here outweighs the interest of appellant or any other individual. The protection of the public requires not merely discussion, but information. …Whatever is added to the field of libel is taken from the field of free debate.
The Privy Council in Hector v AG of Antigua and Barbuda expressed sentiments, which we in Malaysia should heed, namely:
In a free democratic society it is almost too obvious to need stating that those who hold office in government and who are responsible for public administration must always be open to criticism. Any attempt to stifle or fetter such criticism amounts to political censorship of the most insidious and objectionable kind.
We urge the Prime Minister and his political party to withdraw their defamation suit against Mkini and its editors. The Prime Minister should instead take the opportunity to reply or rebut any adverse or incorrect comments made by members of the public.
Sumber HD - 7-6-2014
BAIK
ReplyDeleteBAIK
ReplyDelete