Najib has no choice but to sue WSJ for defamation, lawyers say
News Desk
The Straits Times

SINGAPORE: -- There is little choice for Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak but to sue for defamation now that The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) has stood by its report that US$700 million was found in his personal bank accounts, lawyers said.

A delay in Najib's move to seek legal recourse would be seen as if the newspaper had been accurate in its July 2 and July 6 reports, which it said were based on documents sourced from investigators, the Malaysian Insider reported on Thursday.

The news portal quoted lawyers as saying that Najib could file the suit in Malaysia or elsewhere where the report was published.

The website quoted lawyer Bastian Pius Vendargon as saying that Najib's next step is to name the journalist and publisher, Dow Jones & Company, as defendants to kickstart his civil action for loss of reputation.

"I don't think it is necessary for Najib's lawyers to send a notice of demand to ask the publisher to retract the report and ask for an apology since they are firm on their stand," he said.

Full story: http://www.asianewsnet.net/news-78453.html

-- ANN 2015-07-23

This should be good. For about 5 minutes...

WSJ is an American Newspaper.

Americans have a thing called the First Amendment.. which states.. The freedom of the press shall not be infringed.

It'll get thrown out in less than a minute.. so that 700 million thing will actually cost him 700 million + a lawyer's hourly fee!

WSJ is an American Newspaper.

Americans have a thing called the First Amendment.. which states.. The freedom of the press shall not be infringed.

It'll get thrown out in less than a minute.. so that 700 million thing will actually cost him 700 million + a lawyer's hourly fee!

Unlikely that they will file suit in the US and so First Amendment protections will not apply. My guess is that they will file either in Malaysia or the UK. The UK is notorious for its pro plaintiff defamation laws that make it significantly harder for a defendant to receive a fair trial.

David

'Kickstart his civil action for loss of reputation'? Feeling lucky is he?

All Najib can do is to deny the WSJ any sales in Malaysia.

The NYT can't be sold in China, nor the web site seen. But Wen Jia Bao still stands accused of taking hundreds of millions of RMB from the chinese people, as reported by the NYT. He threatened to sue too, 3 yrs ago. Still waiting.

It would be a libel suit, nothing to do with 1st Amendment protections.

Najib is in quite a jam now. Don't sue, he's basically admitting guilt. Sue, and it all comes out in court. Plenty of entertainment to come.

'Kickstart his civil action for loss of reputation'? Feeling lucky is he?

There was a case years ago in which the court found that the plaintiff had been defamed but set damages at $1 ...with the implication that the reputation was worth no more.

An off-topic post has been removed.

WSJ is an American Newspaper.

Americans have a thing called the First Amendment.. which states.. The freedom of the press shall not be infringed.

It'll get thrown out in less than a minute.. so that 700 million thing will actually cost him 700 million + a lawyer's hourly fee!

Unlikely that they will file suit in the US and so First Amendment protections will not apply. My guess is that they will file either in Malaysia or the UK. The UK is notorious for its pro plaintiff defamation laws that make it significantly harder for a defendant to receive a fair trial.

David

Wrong jurisdiction.

WSJ is an American Newspaper.

Americans have a thing called the First Amendment.. which states.. The freedom of the press shall not be infringed.

It'll get thrown out in less than a minute.. so that 700 million thing will actually cost him 700 million + a lawyer's hourly fee!

Unlikely that they will file suit in the US and so First Amendment protections will not apply. My guess is that they will file either in Malaysia or the UK. The UK is notorious for its pro plaintiff defamation laws that make it significantly harder for a defendant to receive a fair trial.

David

Wrong jurisdiction.

Last time I looked the WSJ is also sold and published in the UK. That would provide a sufficient nexus to give the UK courts jurisdiction.

David