Court Strikes Out Lawyers For Liberty Suits Linked To Singapore Home Minister

---

 


The Malaysian government has succeeded in its application to strike out Lawyers for Liberty’s (LFL) two suits linked to Singapore’s attempt to enforce the republic’s anti-fake news law against the local law advocacy group.
Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Ahmad Kamal Mohd Shahid allowed the striking-out application against LFL’s two originating summons late this afternoon.
One suit targeted Singaporean Home Minister K Shanmugam (above) as the defendant, while the second legal action listed the Malaysian government as the defendant.
Lawyers for Liberty counsel Shahid Adli Kamarudin confirmed the court’s ruling when contacted by Malaysiakini. He said that Ahmad Kamal conveyed his verdict via email to the parties today.
“Striking out allowed by the court,” the lawyer said, adding that he will take instructions from LFL on whether to appeal today’s verdict.
LFL filed its suit against Shanmugam on Jan 24 last year over Singapore’s attempt to enforce its Protection from Online Falsehoods and Manipulation Act 2019 (Pofma) on the group.
The lawsuit followed Shanmugam’s order for LFL to admit alleged falsehoods in its blog post.
Later, on Sept 18 last year, LFL filed an originating summons against the Malaysian government over its alleged failure to uphold the group’s freedom of speech from being encroached upon by Singapore’s anti-fake news law.
The Malaysian government was previously allowed by the Kuala Lumpur High Court to intervene in LFL’s suit against Shanmugam while it (the Malaysian government) was listed as a defendant in LFL’s second suit.

The plaintiff suing Shanmugam is LFL while in relation to the suit against the Malaysian government, the listed plaintiffs are LFL and its adviser N Surendran.

It was reported that LFL’s suit against Shanmugam sought, among others, a court declaration that the Singaporean minister or anyone acting under his authority cannot take any action to enforce any provision under the republic's Pofma against the plaintiffs.

The suit against the Malaysian government, meanwhile, is over its (the Malaysian government) alleged failure to defend the plaintiffs’ fundamental right to free speech and expression against encroachment by Singapore’s anti-fake news law.
On Oct 1 last year, Singapore media reported the republic’s Home Ministry as saying that the Kuala Lumpur High Court had struck out LFL’s suit against Shanmugam.
Two days later, LFL issued a media statement stating that the suit against Shanmugam had “simply expired” as it had not yet been served on the Singaporean minister. The group also clarified that the Malaysian courts had allowed it to refile the suit.
According to a copy of an affidavit-in-support of the Malaysian government’s bid to strike out LFL’s two suits, Attorney-General Idrus Harun characterised their legal actions as frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process.
He contended that Singapore was a sovereign state as acknowledged by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong through an Acknowledgement Certificate (Sijil Pengiktirafan) on April 16 last year, thus the republic had immunity against Malaysian courts.
“The (LFL’s legal) action is an effort by the plaintiff to use the local court process to avoid and release itself from Singapore’s legal action in Singapore,” Idrus contended. - Mkini

---