Court of Appeal dismisses activist's stay application (The Sun Daily, 23/8/2011)

Court of Appeal dismisses activist's stay application

Posted on 23 August 2011 - 08:12pm

Tan Yi Liang
newsdesk@thesundaily.com

PUTRAJAYA (Aug 23, 2011): The Court of Appeal today dismissed an application filed by human rights activist Charles Hector Fernandez to stay a RM10 million libel suit against him at the Shah Alam High Court, pending the hearing of another application before the appellate court.

The quorum comprising Justices Datuk Zainun Ali, Datuk Zahariah Ibrahim and Anantham Kasinather also ordered Fernandez to pay RM10,000 cost to the plaintiff, Asahi Kosei (M) Sdn Bhd.

With the ruling, the libel suit is set to proceed today at the Shah Alam High Court before Judge Lim Yee Lan. 

The court has set three days for the trial.

In submissions before the quorum, Fernandez's counsel, Francis Pereira said the application was made as hearings were pending in October for an application before the Court of Appeal over entering 31 Myanmar nationals as parties to the libel suit.

The 31 were said to be employees of the plaintiff in the libel suit, Asahi Kosei (M) Sdn Bhd.

"A determining factor would be who is the employer of these workers. Our argument is if the court is going to determine the employer of the workers, the workers must be made parties to the proceedings," said Pereira.

Asahi Kosei, an electronics and automotive parts manufacturer had filed the suit on Feb 14, 2011 seeking RM10 million in damages for six blog posts written by Fernandez related to the treatment of the 31 workers.

In rebuttal, Asahi Kosei counsel John Fam Sin Nin said that the application to make the Myanmar nationals parties to the proceedings was inconsistent with the earlier stand of the defence to call the 31 workers as witnesses.

Speaking to media after proceedings, Pereira said that one of the counter-claims sought was a declaration that Asahi Kosei is the employer of the workers and is responsible for their welfare.

"Based on that, we filed an application to add the workers as parties to the proceeding because if the court is going to determine who the employer is, the employees better be there," said Pereira. - The Sun Daily, 23/8/2011, Court of Appeal dismisses activist's stay application

APPELLATE COURT DENIES STAY ORDER TO HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST (Bernama)

APPELLATE COURT DENIES STAY ORDER TO HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST

PUTRAJAYA, Aug 23 (Bernama) -- A human rights activist failed to obtain an order from the Court of Appeal here to stay the trial of a defamation suit filed against him, which was scheduled tomorrow.

Justices Datuk Zainun Ali, Datuk Zaharah Ibrahim and Anantham Kasinather dismissed Charles Hector Fernandez''s stay application and ordered him to pay RM10,000 in legal costs.

Japanese company, Asahi Kosei Sdn Bhd, sued Fernandez for defamation over his blog posts which highlighted the plight of Myanmar migrant workers working in the factory.

The Shah Alam High Court has set three days, beginning tomorrow, for trial of the suit.

Fernandez, who is also a lawyer, sought for a stay of the trial, pending his appeal to the appelllate court concerning his application to include the 31 migrant workers as defendants in the suit, which was rejected by the High Court.

The appeal is fixed for hearing at the Court of Appeal on Oct 5.

Asahi Kosei sought damages of RM10 million, claiming that six entries published in Fernandez''s blog contained false statements, resulting in the company receiving queries from its clients, demanding explanation over the blog entries.

Fernandez was represented by Francis Pereira and Sharmini Thiruchelvam while John Fam Sin Nin appeared for the company. 

-- BERNAMA [Bernama, 23/8/2011,APPELLATE COURT DENIES STAY ORDER TO HUMAN RIGHTS ACTIVIST]

Also reported in New Straits Times, 23/8/2011, Appelate Court denies stay order to human rights activist

MySinchew.Com, 23/8/2011, Appellate court denies stay order to activist

Malaysiakini, 23/8/2011, Appellate court denies stay order to rights activist

Mahkamah Rayuan tolak permohonan aktivis tangguh bicara

23/08/2011 5:04pm

PUTRAJAYA 23 Ogos - Seorang aktivis hak asasi manusia gagal mendapatkan perintah daripada Mahkamah Rayuan di sini bagi penangguhan perbicaraan saman fitnah yang difailkan terhadapnya, yang dijadualkan esok.

Hakim Datuk Zainun Ali, Hakim Datuk Zaharah Ibrahim dan Hakim Anantham Kasinather menolak permohonan Charles Hector Fernandez bagi penangguhan perbicaraan itu dan memerintahkannya membayar RM10,000 bagi kos undang-undang.

Syarikat Jepun, Kosei Sdn. Bhd., menyaman Fernandez bagi memfitnah berhubung tulisan dalam blognya yang memaparkan masalah pekerja Myanmar di kilang itu.

Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam menetapkan tiga hari bermula esok bagi perbicaraan saman itu.

Fernandez, yang juga seorang peguam, memohon perbicaraan ditangguhkan sementara menunggu keputusan rayuannya di mahkamah rayuan berhubung permohonannya bagi disenaraikan 31 pekerja asing itu sebagai defendan dalam saman itu, yang telah ditolak oleh Mahkamah Tinggi. - Bernama - Utusan Malaysia Online, 23/8/2011, Mahkamah Rayuan tolak permohonan aktivis tangguh bicara

El inquietante caso por difamación a un bloguero en Malasia (Global Voices - Espanol)

Esta es una publicación de la bloguera invitada, doctora Agnès Callamard, de ARTÍCULO 19 [en].

Antes del juicio por difamación al bloguero y defensor de derechos humanos - Charles Hector [en] el 28 y 29 de junio de 2011, ARTÍCULO 19 reclamó a la Corte Malasia considerar el caso siguiendo los lineamientos de los parámetros internacionales de libertad de expresión.

Dada la importancia fundamental del derecho a la libertad de expresión y su reconocimiento en el artículo 10 de la Constitución de Malasia, ARTÍCULO 19 instó a la Corte a garantizar que la ley de difamación de Malasia sea interpretada, hasta donde sea posible, de forma que respete  la libertad de expresión de Hector.

Charles Hector ha sido demandado por difamación ante la Corte Superior de Malasia en Shah Alam por la subsidiaria malasia de Asahi Kosei Japan Co. Ltd, una compañía electrónica japonesa. El caso de difamación está centrado en artículos que Hector publicó en su blog en los que manifiesta su preocupación sobre el tratamiento que la compañía da a 31 trabajadores migrantes de Myanmar. Sus hallazgos estaban basados en averiguaciones que realizó. La compañía, que ha obtenido ya una orden de interdicción contra los posts del blog de Hector, demanda perjuicios por 10 millones de RM (ringgit, aprox. US$ 3.2 millones).

Aunque Malasia no ha firmado ni ratificado el Convenio Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos y los parámetros internacionales sobre difamación no son formalmente obligatorios para el país, ARTÍCULO 19 considera que la garantía constitucional del derecho a la libre expresión en Malasia permite un amplio ámbito de interpretación.

En particular, ARTÍCULO 19 instó a la Corte a reconocer que la carga de la prueba con respecto a la falsedad de las afirmaciones en el blog debe pesar en la parte demandante. Además bajo estándares internacionales aunque se haya demostrado que la afirmación de un hecho es falsa, los acusados en un proceso por difamación deben tener el beneficio de la defensa de una “publicación razonable”, conocida también como defensa de “diligencia debida” o “buena fe”. Por lo tanto, argumenta ARTÍCULO 19, Hector no debería ser hecho responsable si se establece que tenía la convicción de buena fe de la verdad de sus publicaciones.

ARTÍCULO 19 considera también que dada la naturaleza de su blog, Hector debería beneficiarse del privilegio de publicación razonable garantizado en el Acta de Difamación de Malasia. Finalmente, de rechazar la Corte las defensas y hallar difamatorias las afirmaciones, el monto de los perjuicios debe evaluarse con criterio de proporcionalidad.

ARTÍCULO 19 advierte que la compensación en la cuantía que la compañía busca habrá de generar un efecto coactivo sustancial en el futuro ejercicio del derecho a la libertad de expresión no sólo de parte de Hector sino también de otros medios y defensores de derechos humanos en Malasia.

Source: Global Voices, Espanol

HRW : Malaysia: Lawsuit Against Rights Defender Impedes Public Debate

Malaysia: Lawsuit Against Rights Defender Impedes Public Debate

Blogger on Migrant Workers’ Treatment Faces Company’s Defamation Claim

June 22, 2011

(Tokyo) - A defamation lawsuit against a human rights defender who blogged against violations of migrant worker rights threatens to chill debate on matters of public interest in Malaysia, Human Rights Watch said today. In a case currently before the Malaysian courts, the Malaysian subsidiary of Asahi Kosei Japan Co. Ltd. brought a defamation suit for 10 million ringgit (US$3.3 million) against Malaysian activist Charles Hector for his blog posts on February 8 and 9, 2011, criticizing the treatment of Burmese migrant workers at the company's facility.

Hector's blog posts were based on information gathered by interviewing 31 Burmese migrant workers. Two days before posting the information online, he emailed his allegations to the company seeking a response but received no reply. The company claims Hector's emails went to an account that was rarely used. Asahi Kosei filed a lawsuit six days later. The company's claims do not appear to contest the information about rights abuses in the blogs but rather assert that Hector mischaracterized the work relationship of the migrant workers who were not the company's responsibility because they were supplied by an outside firm and not placed on the company's direct payroll.

"The astronomical sums being demanded by Asahi Kosei threaten both to bankrupt the defendant and to intimidate labor and human rights defenders all over Malaysia," said Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch. "A company's right to protect its reputation should not become a way to cut off important discussions of matters of public concern."

On February 17, Asahi Kosei obtained an injunction that prevents Hector from blogging about the company's treatment of migrant workers until the end of the trial, which could take many years. The trial is expected to begin on June 28.

On March 11, the Malaysian Bar issued a statement supporting Hector. Citing the Whistle Blowers Protection Act 2010, the Human Rights Commission of Malaysia Act 1999, and other laws, the bar stated that, "it is felt that it is best that the company does not continue to go after the ‘whistle blower' but rather to commence the necessary investigations and do the needful to ensure that all rights of workers that work in the company are not violated, and justice is upheld."

Migrant worker rights have long been a concern in Malaysia. Migrant workers frequently receive low wages, suffer from dirty and dangerous working conditions, and are prohibited from changing employers. Employers frequently seize migrant workers' passports, limiting their freedom of movement. Many migrant workers pay exorbitant recruitment fees to labor brokers in their home country and in Malaysia, making them effectively debt-bonded until they can pay back the fees. Ministry of Home Affairs regulations prohibit migrant workers from forming associations and unions. And a migrant worker who becomes undocumented faces arrest as an "illegal migrant" - male migrants found to be illegal are subject to caning, which is a form of torture.

For over a decade, the UN special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression has noted that civil defamation laws, like criminal defamation laws, can improperly restrict freedom of expression. Abid Hussain, the special rapporteur in 2000, outlined a list of minimum requirements that civil defamation laws need to satisfy to respect the right to freedom of expression. Several pertain to lawsuits brought by private parties as well as by government officials, including:

Sanctions for defamation should not be so large as to exert a chilling effect on freedom of opinion and expression and the right to seek, receive, and impart information. Damage awards should be strictly proportionate to the actual harm caused.

Defamation laws should reflect the importance of open debate about matters of public interest.

Where publications relate to matters of public interest, it is excessive to require truth in order to avoid liability for defamation; instead, it should be sufficient if the author has made reasonable efforts to ascertain the truth.

"Malaysia has an extremely poor reputation on freedom of expression," Robertson said. "Improving the right to a free airing of views on human rights issues won't be achieved by ‘privatizing' excessive restrictions on speech." - Human Rights Watch

*


More Coverage:
Associated Press- Company Chastised for Suing Malaysia Rights Lawyer
Free Malaysia Today- Lawsuit Against Blogger Threatens Free Speech

The astronomical sums being demanded by Asahi Kosei threaten both to bankrupt the defendant and to intimidate labor and human rights defenders all over Malaysia. A company’s right to protect its reputation should not become a way to cut off important discussions of matters of public concern.

- Phil Robertson, deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch

Dakwa langgar hak asasi: Syarikat Jepun saman fitnah peguam, aktivis (Utusan Malaysia, 12/4/2011)

Dakwa langgar hak asasi: Syarikat Jepun saman fitnah peguam, aktivis

SHAH ALAM 11 April - Seorang aktivis hak asasi manusia disaman oleh syarikat elektronik Jepun yang beroperasi dekat sini atas tuduhan memfitnah syarikat tersebut di dalam laman blog lelaki itu berkaitan dakwaan syarikat berkenaan melanggar hak asasi 31 pekerja Myanmar.

Syarikat Asahi Kosei Sdn. Bhd. selaku plaintif memfailkan saman tersebut terhadap Charles Hector yang juga seorang peguam, pada 14 Februari lalu di Mahkamah Tinggi di sini.

Hector selaku defendan hari ini bagaimanapun gagal dalam usahanya untuk mengetepikan injunksi ex-parte (sebelah pihak) yang diperoleh oleh plaintif pada 17 Februari lalu.

Peguam Francis Pereira yang mewakili Hector ketika ditemui pemberita di luar mahkamah berkata, Hakim Lim Yee Lan menolak permohonan Hector itu dalam prosiding di kamar hakim tersebut di sini.

Plaintif mengemukakan tuntutan ganti rugi RM10 juta dan permohonan maaf secara terbuka daripada Hector selain peguam itu diarahkan memadam maklumat dalam blognya berkaitan kes pekerja Myanmar yang mengaitkan syarikat itu.

Plaintif yang telah 15 tahun menjalankan perniagaan di negara ini menyatakan, pihaknya tidak bertanggungjawab di atas apa yang berlaku kepada pekerja-pekerja atas alasan semua pekerja itu dibekal dan diuruskan oleh agensi pekerjaan.

Plaintif mendakwa terpaksa menanggung kerugian akibat paparan di blog milik defendan yang telah menggugat reputasi dan imej perniagaan plaintif.

Plaintif turut memohon satu perintah injunksi ex-parte (sebelah pihak) terhadap Hector dengan memerintahkan defendan memadam semua tulisan di blog http://indefenceofcharleshector.blogspot.com/ berkaitan pekerja Myanmar serta menghentikan sebarang komunikasi di laman-laman sosial berkenaan isu itu.

Hector kemudian memohon agar mahkamah mengetepikan perintah injunksi itu atas alasan pihak plaintif sepatutnya mengadakan dialog dengan pekerja-pekerja tersebut dan bukannya bertindak memfailkan saman terhadapnya. - Utusan Malaysia, 12/4/2011, Dakwa langgar hak asasi: Syarikat Jepun saman fitnah peguam, aktivis

Firm gets injunction against activist (New Straits Times, 11/4/2011)

SHAH ALAM: Japanese multinational corporation Asahi Kosei Sdn Bhd yesterday obtained an interim injunction from the High Court here restraining human rights activist Charles Hector Fernandez from highlighting the plight of its migrant workers from Myanmar in his blog posts. 

Judge Datuk Lim Yee Lan granted the injunction in chambers pending the hearing of a defamation suit filed by Asahi Kosei demanding a compensation of RM10 million from Fernandez, who is also a lawyer.

Lim also dismissed Fernandez's application to set aside the ex-parte injunction granted on Asahi Kosei on Feb 17.

The company was represented by counsel John Fam, Freeda Santhiago and Tan Tai Hwa. Counsel Francis Pereira and Sharmini Thiruchelvam appeared for Hector.

Pereira told reporters that the court made the decision on the grounds that bloggers could not claim the same defences claimed by the media.

On Feb 14, Asahi Kosei sued Fernandez for allegedly defaming the company in his blog at charleshector.blogspot.com.

It claimed that Fernandez had maliciously published the six entries between Feb 8 and 13 which contained false statements, resulting in the company's clients demanding an explanation over the blog entries. -- Bernama - New Straits Times, 11/4/2011,Firm gets injunction against activist

Read more: Firm gets injunction against activist http://www.nst.com.my/nst/articles/13asn/Article#ixzz1JHHKHQgd

Asahi Kosei obtains Interim Injuction Against Human Rights Activist (Bernama)

Asahi Kosei Peroleh Injunksi Interim Terhadap Aktivis Hak Asasi Manusia 

SHAH ALAM, 11 April (Bernama) -- Sebuah perbadanan multinasional Jepun, Asahi Kosei Sdn Bhd hari ini memperoleh injunksi interim daripada Mahkamah Tinggi di sini yang menghalang seorang aktivis hak asasi manusia, Charles Hector Fernandez daripada menyiarkan nasib pekerja pendatang Myanmar dalam blognya.

Hakim Datuk Lim Yee Lan mengeluarkan injunksi itu dalam kamar sementara menunggu perbicaraan saman fitnah yang difailkan oleh Asahi Kosei yang meminta pampasan RM10 juta terhadap Hector, seorang peguam.

Lim juga menolak permohonan Hector untuk mengetepikan injunksi ex-parte yang dikeluarkan kepada Asahi Kosei pada 17 Feb.

Perbadanan itu yang diwakili oleh John Fam, Freeda Santhiago dan Tan Tai Hwa sementara peguam Francis Pereira dan Sharmini Thiruchelvam bagi Hector.

Pereira memberitahu pemberita bahawa mahkamah itu membuat keputusan tersebut atas alasan bahawa penulis blog berkenaan tidak boleh menuntut pembelaan yang sama yang boleh dituntut oleh media. Mahkamah itu merasakan bahawa kes tersebut yang kita kemukakan adalah berbeza kerana ia hanya untuk media dan bukan penulis blog.

"Selain itu, kerana ada banyak perkara lain untuk diselesaikan, mahkamah telah mengosongkan tarikh perbicaraan 19, 20 dan 21 April. Kita buat permohonan untuk pindaan pembelaan kita dan mohon tuntutan balas dan satu permohonan untuk memasukkan semua 31 pekerja berkaitan sebagai pihak dalam proseding," kata beliau.

Pada 14 Feb lepas, Asahi Kosei selaku plaintif memfailkan saman terhadap Hector bagi menuntut ganti rugi berjumlah RM10 juta kerana didakwa mengeluarkan entri berunsur fitnah berhubung isu pekerja-pekerja Myanmar yang bekerja di kilang milik syarikat pelaburan asing dari Jepun itu dalam blog miliknya yang beralamat di www.charleshector.blogspot.com.

Dalam penyataan tuntutannya, Asahi Kosei berkata ia telah berdagang lebih daripada 15 tahun dalam industri pengeluaran bagi komponen video, hard disk drive komputer dan komponen untuk automotif bagi pasaran tempatan dan luar negera serta mempunyai pelanggan seperti Hitachi Otomotive Group, Denso Group, Toyota Group, Mitsubishi Heavy Industry Group dan Calsonic Group.

Syarikat itu berkata ia mempunyai modal saham yang dibenarkan sebanyak RM50 juta yang dibahagikan kepada 50 juta saham biasa bernilai RM1 setiap satu di mana modal saham yang diterbitkan yang telah dibayar secara penuh adalah sebanyak RM50 juta. Asahi Kosei seterusnya mendakwa Hector dengan perasaan dengki atau secara cuai telah memaparkan sebanyak enam entri di blog tersebut antara 8 Feb dan 13 Feb lepas yang mempunyai kenyataan-kenyataan palsu.

Berikutan entri-entri tersebut, plaintif mendakwa ia telah berhadapan dengan banyak pertanyaan daripada pelanggan-pelanggannya yang mendesak syarikat itu memberi penjelasan dan turut mengalami kerugian teruk.

Asahi Kosei mendakwa entri-entri itu juga mempunyai maksud bahawa syarikat berkenaan telah menipu dan tidak berperikemanusiaan serta bersikap kejam terhadap pekerja-pekerja.

Syarikat itu turut mendakwa walaupun pihaknya membuat tuntutan melalui surat tuntutan bertarikh 11 Feb lepas supaya defendan menarik balik entri-entri tersebut dan memohon maaf tetapi defendan gagal membuat sebarang tawaran atau memohon maaf secara ikhlas.

Sehubungan itu, Asahi Kosei memohon satu injunksi untuk menghalang Hector daripada menyiarkan atau memaparkan semula kenyataan mengenai pekerja-pekerja Myanmar yang berkaitan dengan syarikat itu melalui blognya atau dengan apa-apa cara komunikasi yang lain.

Plaintif juga menuntut ganti rugi teruk dan teladan berjumlah RM10 juta, faedah selaras dengan Akta Undang-Undang Sivil 1956, kos guaman dan relif-relif lain yang difikirkan sesuai oleh mahkamah.

-- BERNAMA, 11/4/2011, Asahi Kosei Peroleh Injunksi Interim Terhadap Aktivis Hak Asasi Manusia