Four security workers had the shock of their lives when they received legal notices suing them for RM10m (yes, seven zeroes – 10,000,000 ringgit!) for defaming their former employer.
Earlier, they had gone through a long and tough struggle to get reinstated to the jobs they had lost, and recover wages due to them. They had worked as security guards at the Ipoh General Hospital on a two-year contract with a Ministry of Health-appointed contractor.
The contractor had not been paying them according to the labour act and had fired them after they reported the matter to the Labour Department. When the media carried their story, the employer claimed his reputation was unfairly tarnished.
The socialist party PSM is currently facing four defamation suits related to its work with several grassroots sectors.
- The party chairman, Dr Jeyakumar Devaraj, is being sued by the Perak State Economic Development Corporation (PKNP) for a media statement he made during the eviction of vegetable farmers from their intergenerational plots of land in Kanthan. The PKNP had chosen to sell these productive plots for development rather than lease them to the farmers
- The Marhaen Cattle Herders network coordinator from Sungai Siput PSM, Sukumaran, has also been slapped with a defamation suit by a Perak State Legislative Assembly member and Perak state executive council member. Sukumaran and his fellow cattle farmers (estate workers rearing livestock for extra income) had criticised the executive council member for asking them to leave the plantations upon retirement; they had urged him to visit them to understand the situation. The executive council member responded in the media to Sime Darby-Guthrie’s attempts, in line with its recent ‘zero cattle’ policy, to evict cattle farmers from their traditional grazing grounds in oil palm estates. PSM has been supporting the cattle herders on the basis of food security, backed by findings of agro-scientists of the advantages of integrated farming involving cattle rearing in oil palm estates
- And the PSM chairman again and party secretary general M Sivaranjani have been named as defendants in yet another defamation suit filed by a major construction firm. Last year, migrant workers who were victims of a quota fraud scandal had, with the assistance of PSM activists, filed complaints of abuse linked to human trafficking and modern-day slavery. They had been promised jobs but upon arrival in Malaysia were abandoned without jobs and income for months. They filed claims at the Labour Department and their story was released to the media. Their employer asserts the workers have defamed him with their ‘false’ claims for redress
- The fourth suit is the one facing the security workers mentioned above
Ordinary people can understand the notion of a defamation suit as a legal recourse for one who has been wrongly and maliciously vilified.
But all the above four suits are completely baffling to the affected communities and does not fit this notion – for the substance of the defamation suits is a litany of the injustices suffered at the hands of the plaintiffs, and submitted by the aggrieved communities for redress to government agencies and the courts, and [there were] covered by the media.
The claim of mortal defamation on these grounds defies logic and reflects the degree of sophistry that has crept into civil litigation.
- Sign up for Aliran's free daily email updates or weekly newsletters or both
- Make a one-off donation to Persatuan Aliran Kesedaran Negara, CIMB a/c 8004240948
- Make a regular pledge or periodic auto-donation to Aliran
- Become an Aliran member
Take the case of the four contract security guards, all women in their 50s, including two single mothers. They had filed claims at the Ipoh Labour Department in August 2022 related to the following:
- wrongful calculation of all overtime since the start of the contract in September 2021
- Unpaid minimum wages for the initial months of the RM1,500 minimum wage order. And no corresponding increase in Employees Provident Fund and Social Security Organisation contributions
- miscellaneous wrongful deductions for absence from work (RM150 for a day’s absence), etc
- annual leave issues
The day after the filing at the Labour Department, all four workers lost their jobs. They then filed for reinstatement at the Industrial Relations Department on the grounds of wrongful dismissal.
Two months later, a settlement was reached during a conciliation meeting at the Industrial Relations Department. Both parties signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that the workers would be restored to their original positions, service intact. It was a huge relief for the women whose decision to fight for their rights had driven them into serious hardship.
To their dismay, however, and to the wonderment of PSM activists, the employer boldly defied the MoU, thereby prolonging the suffering of the workers.
The workers appealed to the Industrial Relations Department; the appeal process took its time and the workers grew increasingly anxious. They realised that by the time of the department’s decision, the employer’s contract would be over, and a judgment in their favour would be purely academic.
It took a sit-in protest at the Ministry of Health, Putrajaya by the workers and activists to get the ministry to intervene and instruct the contractor to comply with the MoU. The workers were finally reinstated, and a few months later, won their claims at the labour court.
But the employer appealed against the Labour Department order, and as it turned out, the High Court struck off the employer’s appeal with costs. The workers were paid their claims (the cost remains unpaid), and the workers have moved on. And now they have been hit with this sudden and incomprehensible defamation suit.
The security workers’ suit is based on an article that appeared in the media to whom the workers had spoken after the initial filing of their claims at the Labour Department. The article carried in detail the claims they had submitted – for the balance of overtime payments according to the rates in the Employment Act, lunch hour to be included as overtime since there was no clear break, minimum wages when it was due, the return of wrongful wage deductions and so on. The article carried the workers’ comments on the effects of these violations on their finances.
The RM10m suit claims that all the statements in the media article are false, libelous and malicious, and falsely portray the plaintiff as an irresponsible, uncaring, law-breaking employer. That thereby the statements are ruinous to his reputation and business prospects.
The other three suits are similar. Statements and comments based on the actual struggles of communities against oppression are made into the subject matter of defamation suits, with plaintiffs feigning complete innocence on their part.
Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation, known as Slapps, are intimidating to the marhaen (ordinary folk) and poor communities, a deterrent to reporters and the media, a drain on resources for activists, and a waste of court time. They discourage people whose rights have been violated from coming forward to seek remedy and to use the media.
Defamation laws have their place in society. But when rich and powerful companies (and individuals) abuse them to intimidate ordinary people and activists, legitimate criticism is silenced and democracy suffers.
Courts should be empowered – by fresh legislation if necessary – to impose heavy penalties on parties that misuse defamation provisions to bully people into silence. – PSM
Rani Rasiah is a central committee member of PSM.
- Tegakkan maruah serta kualiti kehidupan rakyat
- Galakkan pembangunan saksama, lestari serta tangani krisis alam sekitar
- Raikan kerencaman dan keterangkuman
- Selamatkan demokrasi dan angkatkan keluhuran undang-undang
- Lawan rasuah dan kronisme
