The Department of Business Law and Taxation at Monash University Malaysia, in collaboration with the Bar Council Defamation Law Reform Subcommittee, successfully hosted a symposium on June 2, 2023, focusing on the profound impact of apologies as a remedy for defamation in Malaysia.
The Joint Symposium commenced with a compelling presentation by Monash University Malaysia lecturers Dr Abdul Majid and Dr Ridoan Karim, who co-authored the research paper “The apology as a remedy in defamation in Malaysia and Hong Kong.”
This seminal research formed the basis of subsequent discussions and provided valuable insights into the role of apologies in defamation cases. During the symposium, Dr Karim shed light on the significance of court-ordered apologies, emphasising that a mere verbal expression of “sorry” is insufficient.
Dr Karim and Dr Majid proposed that a court should order an apology only when monetary damages are insufficient to restore the plaintiff’s reputation. They further suggested that plaintiffs must explicitly request an apology alongside damages, and the court-ordered apology should be awarded in conjunction with damages, rather than as a standalone remedy.
While there was a consensus among the speakers regarding these proposals, Datuk Vazeer Alam emphasised that an apology order constitutes a specific type of mandatory injunction. It directs the defendant to apologise to the plaintiff, either orally in court or through written or electronic publication in specified media.
Traditionally, damages have been the primary recourse for defamation cases. However, in Malaysia, there is an increasing trend of plaintiffs seeking apologies as a remedy, either in isolation or in addition to damages. Mariette Peters underscored the significance of apologies in resolving defamation cases, safeguarding a plaintiff’s reputation, and upholding their dignity.
Saraswathy Shirke Deo emphasised on the effect of an apology on the plaintiff’s mental health and well-being and Nahendran Navaratnam believes that court-ordered apologies should be given when the wrongdoer is genuinely willing to apologise and the courts sense that the defendant is remorseful. Saraswathy and Nahendran voiced their belief that court-ordered apologies should be granted only when the wrongdoer genuinely expresses remorse and the courts ascertain the defendant’s sincerity.
Despite the complex and technical aspects discussed during the symposium, there was a unanimous agreement on the four key elements that an apology for defamation in Malaysia should encompass:
1/ Admission of fault
2/ Retraction of defamatory statements
3/ Expression of regret
4/ Demonstration of a change in behaviour accompanied by a humble demeanour
