MALAYSIAKINI did its part to remove comments by readers, which are alleged to have accused the judiciary of corruption, the news portal’s lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar told a Federal Court panel today.

Malik, who was assisted by Surendra Ananth and Khoo Suk Chyi, argued that the comments were removed days later when notified by the police.

Due to the very large volume of traffic, Malik said the Malaysiakini staff had no realistic means of immediate editorial control over third party comments that were posted.

“In the online media, the ability to leave comments is an essential part of the role of the press. The company has taken its role as journalists seriously,” he told the court.

The apex court panel of seven judges, led by Court of Appeal president Rohana Yusuf, today dismissed Malaysiakini’s and its editor-in-chief Steven Gan’s application to strike out contempt charges brought against them by Attorney-General Idrus Harun.

The court ruled that a contempt hearing be held on July 13.

Malik said the website’s automated filter only censors explicit language on the average of some 2,000 comments received daily.

The court was also informed that the news portal has 25,000 subscribers. Malik added that there were no legal obligations to censor comments before publication.

The lawyer also questioned why the matter was brought straight to the apex court instead of the high court, where Malaysiakini and Gan, 58, would be afforded two levels of appeal.

Senior federal counsel Suzana Atan, who was assisted by S. Narkunavathy, argued that the apex court must hear the matter as the comments impugned the chief justice directly.

The comments, which implied and alleged corruption in the judiciary, were read out in court, as were the usernames.

Suzana also said the news portal was irresponsible as it had left the comments made on June 9 and only removed them on June 12 after being notified by the police.

“They should exercise that responsibility by having control, with a taking-down policy that immediately removes such comments.

“The intent is they failed to moderate or take a more active role in the comment section they provide for subscribers,” she said, in response to a panel question on criminal intent.

The panel reminded Suzana prosecutors have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a crime occurred.

“I think they have the filter. They could have done more. They should have done more in moderating the comment section,” she said in response.

“We say they should have moderated the comments immediately. They should be more proactive instead of having a third party inform them.”

On June 15, Idrus filed contempt charges against Malaysiakini over five readers’ comments on an article about Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s directive to the courts to reopen on July 1, following the easing of movement restrictions.

In the judgment, Rohana said the prosecutors have established a prima facie case that the comments were contemptuous, but said the presumption is rebuttable.

Gan spoke to reporters during a break in proceedings.

“Generally, my advice is that everyone is watching. Just be aware of that and post your comments in a responsible manner, taking cognisance of all the laws that we have to abide by,” he said.

“I can understand that many Malaysians are very angry and upset over the fact that cases against some VVIPs are being dropped.

“So it’s also understandable, naturally, they have posted comments in response to that and some of them may have gone overboard.

“Some of them may have attacked the wrong target but I would like to urge the authorities to listen to them. Just don’t just look at the symptoms, look at the cause,” Gan said.

If found guilty, Gan could face a prison sentence and a fine, while Malaysiakini also faces a fine. – July 2, 2020.