The Kuala Lumpur High Court has awarded Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak RM550,000 in civil damages in his defamation suit against Bersatu leader Badrul Hisham Shaharin, better known as Chegubard, and YouTuber Nurpais Ismail.
Judicial commissioner Arziah Apandi found that the defendants had uttered defamatory statements against the businessperson in a podcast published on Nurpais’ YouTube channel in May last year.
In her verdict this morning, Arziah noted that Farhash’s claims against the duo stood unchallenged as the defendants did not enter any appearance, resulting in the court proceeding with the hearing without their defence on Jan 12.
“For general damages, (considering) the gravity of the allegations, the extent of the publications (and) the plaintiff’s standing in society, (as well as) the need for vindication, I assessed general damages of RM300,000.
“I find that exemplary damages are also warranted because both defendants demonstrated cynical and calculated disregard for the plaintiff’s reputation (in) choosing to exploit and damage his reputation for their own political and commercial purposes.
“An award of exemplary damages is necessary to send a clear message that such conduct will not be tolerated. I, therefore, award exemplary damages of RM100,000 against both defendants, jointly and severally,” she said, adding that she awarded aggravated damages of RM150,000 to Farhash (above, left).
She also ordered Badrul and Nurpais to pay five percent annual interest on the judgment sum, calculated from May 26, 2025, when the case was filed, until it is fully disposed of.
Chegubard explicitly named Farhash
Arziah found that the defendants had made defamatory and damaging statements against Farhash that were clearly capable of tarnishing the businessperson’s reputation.
“The element of reference is satisfied in this case. The first defendant (Badrul) had explicitly named the plaintiff many times throughout the interview, using his commonly known name ‘Farhash’.
“The first defendant left no room for ambiguity by providing specific identifying details, including the plaintiff’s role as Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s former political secretary and ‘blue-eyed boy’.
“The first defendant also identified the plaintiff’s position as a former Perak PKR leader and his corporate appointments in public-listed companies. I therefore find, without hesitation, that the defamatory statements clearly and unambiguously refer to the plaintiff,” she said.
She added that Badrul’s participation in the interview with Nurpais demonstrated the Port Dickson Bersatu chief’s intention and understanding that his words would be disseminated to tens of thousands of viewers.
Purposely crafted questions
The interview, Arziah said, was not a private conversation inadvertently recorded, but a deliberate act of public confrontation through mass media.
“The second defendant (Nurpais) had full editorial control over whether to publish the defamatory content. This conduct goes (against) mere passive publication (as he) participated in the interview by asking questions designed to elicit defamatory responses.
“His question framing and follow-up comments encouraged and facilitated the first defendant’s defamatory statements,” she added.
The court found that Nurpais had compounded this by sensationalising the podcast with titles designed to maximise attention and viewership, thereby saturating the harm caused by the publication.
“The second defendant’s motivation for this publication appears to be commercial gain as he is the director of (a publication) that conducts motivational and financial courses, and he had a business interest in generating viewership and controversy to build his personal brand and attract customers.
“He deliberately exploited the plaintiff’s reputation and the nature of the allegations to serve his own commercial purposes with complete disregard for the damages inflicted on the plaintiff,” Arziah said.
The judgment also found that the defendants were malicious towards the plaintiff, which was further demonstrated by the timing and context of the publication.
‘Cynical exploitation’
She added that the interview addressed politically sensitive matters, including internal PKR disputes and government appointments.
“The defendants exploited this politically charged atmosphere to launch personal attacks on the plaintiff, knowing that the allegations would resonate with opposition and generate controversy.
“The cynical exploitation of (Farhash’s political reputation) for personal gain and publicity demonstrates improper motives,” Arziah said.
The defendants’ statements were found to have tarnished Farhash’s reputation by portraying him as corrupt, dishonest, and undeserving of his titles and achievements.
These allegations, she said, exposed him to public hatred, ridicule, and contempt within his community and among those who knew him personally.
“Although the plaintiff has withdrawn from active politics, he maintains connections within political circles and is known for his former service as the political secretary to the prime minister.
“The defamatory statement has damaged his political legacy by suggesting he was nothing more than a manipulator who exploited his position for personal gain.
“This fundamentally mischaracterises the plaintiff’s political service and contributions,” she added.
Anwar’s ‘blue-eyed boy’, PKR power struggle
Farhash filed the suit on May 26 last year, in response to Chegubard and Nurpais’ podcast published on May 7.
He said in his statement of claim that the defendants had referred to him by name and as “Anwar’s blue-eyed boy”.
He added that the defendants had defamed him by alleging him to be a despicable, immoral, and malicious individual who was allegedly using and controlling the prime minister and his office for personal gain.
“The plaintiff is alleged to be unqualified or should not hold any position in a publicly listed company, thus undermining public and investor trust in his professional reputation in the corporate sector.
“(The defendants claimed) that he is using his position to illegally control and manipulate large companies, portraying it as an abuse of power with fraudulent intent and political influence.
“The plaintiff’s rise in the corporate world is also alleged to be tainted with elements of non-compliance with the law and is solely due to preferential treatment, not his actual abilities,” said Farhash’s statement of claim.
He added that the duo also claimed that he was in a power struggle with former minister Rafizi Ramli to become Anwar and PKR’s “darling”.
The businessperson, through his civil suit, demanded that the court declare that both defendants made defamatory statements against him and issue an injunction order against them.
Farhash also sought a full and unconditional public apology and for the two to retract their statements, in addition to paying monetary compensation of RM1 million in general, exemplary, and aggravated damages, with five percent per annum interest on the sum.
Counsel Nurin Husnina Hussein represented Farhash in the proceedings, while Badrul and Nurpais did not file their appearance and were thus unrepresented. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.