Defamation Case: RM1.45 Million AWARDED Over Five Defamatory Publications

By Messrs Lui Bhullar

Defamation Case: Dr Zakir Naik Awarded RM1.45 Million Against Ramasamy Over Five Defamatory Publications

In a high-profile defamation lawsuit in Malaysia, the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruled in favour of Islamic preacher Dr Zakir Naik, awarding him a total of RM1.45 million in damages against former Penang Deputy Chief Minister II, P. Ramasamy, over five separate defamatory publications. The case serves as a significant precedent for political defamation, especially in the age of social media defamation and online commentary.

🔍 Background of the Defamation Suit

The dispute involved two separate suits (Suits 53 and 70), both filed by Dr Zakir against Ramasamy, stemming from five defamatory statements made over a span of three and a half years. These included Facebook posts, news articles, and interviews published online — mediums that carry wide public reach and enduring impact, central to online defamation cases in Malaysia.

Among the defamatory statements were:

1. A Facebook post referring to Dr Zakir as “satan”, implying he was evil, dishonest, and a threat to racial harmony.

2. Two online articles accusing him of being a fugitive and criticising Malaysian Hindus.

3. An interview with India Today alleging that Dr Zakir abused religion for political gains.

4. A news article suggesting his involvement in influencing government action against LTTE sympathisers.

Dr Zakir contended that these statements were malicious, false, and had severely damaged his reputation both domestically and internationally.

⚖️ Court Findings and Legal Reasoning

The court found that the statements were clearly defamatory, satisfying all three elements of defamation under Malaysian law:

• The statements were defamatory in nature.

• They referred directly to Dr Zakir.

• They were published to third parties via social media and online platforms.

Justice noted that Ramasamy’s defences of justification, fair comment, and qualified privilege were unsustainable. In particular, the use of the term "satan" could not be interpreted metaphorically or illustratively. The publication lacked verification and objective journalism and revealed malice, particularly through the repetitive and targeted nature of the publications.

Ramasamy had also admitted to not verifying his sources or contacting Dr Zakir prior to making the allegations — a failure that further undermined his claims of fair comment.

💰 Damages and Injunction Granted

The court awarded a total of RM1.45 million in damages, broken down as:

• RM1,000,000 in general damages (RM200,000 per publication)

• RM100,000 in compensatory damages

• RM100,000 in aggravated damages

• RM250,000 in exemplary damages

In addition, Ramasamy was ordered to pay RM70,000 in costs and issue an unreserved public apology. Given the repeated attacks, the court also granted injunctive relief to prevent future defamatory acts against Dr Zakir.

🧭 Significance of the Decision

This judgment reinforces the principles governing defamation law in Malaysia, especially in the realm of online defamation and political discourse. It signals that public figures, including politicians, are not immune from liability for defamatory statements made on social media or digital platforms. The case also highlights the Malaysian courts' willingness to issue substantial awards for reputational harm and grant injunctive relief where necessary.

Need Legal Advice on Defamation?

If you're unsure how to sue for defamation in Malaysia or need to identify the person behind defamatory online content, consult our legal team today. At Messrs Lui & Bhullar, we combine strong legal strategy with digital expertise to hold online defamers accountable.

📧 Email: general@luibhullar.com

📞 WhatsApp: +60143000970