High Court to hear defamation suit against Chong on April 7

0

Chong’s lawyers Chong Siew Chiang (right) and Michael Kong holding a discussion after the court proceeding today. – Photo by Roystein Emmor

KUCHING: The High Court here has set three days beginning April 7 to hear a defamation suit filed by the Sarawak government against Sarawak Democratic Action Party (DAP) chairman Chong Chieng Jen.

Judicial Commissioner Christopher Chin has also set March 9 for case management.

The Sarawak government is suing Chong for using the term “black hole” to allegedly insinuate that some RM10 billion had gone missing from state coffers in 2013.

Last week Chong’s bid to review the apex court’s decision which allows the government to sue for defamation was dismissed by the Federal Court, which also ordered Chong to pay RM100,000 in cost.

Chong’s allegation was published in a Chinese national daily, a news portal, and in pamphlets distributed by Chong and the DAP, and also published in the Rocket, Malaysiakini and Sin Chew Jit Poh on Jan 3, 2013.

As a result, the Sarawak government and the State Financial Authority filed a defamation suit against him at the Kuching High Court.

The state government said Chong’s remark meant that it and its Financial Authority, through the budgetary process, had caused billions of ringgit to be siphoned off for the benefit of cronies of members of the government and their families.

On April 28, 2014, the Kuching High Court held that the government and the state Financial Authority were not allowed under common law to sue Chong for defamation even though his words against the government were defamatory, and struck out the suit.

Following an application by the state, the Court of Appeal, in a majority decision on April 7, 2016, set aside the High Court decision.

It ruled that the government has the right to sue for defamation and that the common law prohibiting a government from commencing such action, does not apply to Malaysia.

However, Chong had challenged the decision in the Federal Court, which decided on Sept 26, 2018, to uphold the Appellate Court’s decision.