Back in October 2024, this blog was in pursuit of Murray Hunter, the Australian former UniMAP lecturer turned government critic operating from Thailand. Being critical of the government is hardly the issue. Its feedback on government policies.
He collaborated with Asia Sentinel, a reformasi-era foreign based portal. It is still fair game and appreciated for giving away the identity of those tipping him slanderous and untrue information from KL. Obviously they were former Reformasi activist, who turned against current PKR-lead Unity Government.
Murray was was on the payroll of a former journalist that ruined the premiership of a pious man and led to the eventual downfall of the former BN government. The man seemed to have an old score to settle against the current unity government. Still, having such political intention is nothing unusual.
However, it is something else to lie, slander and falsely accuse innocent individuals and important government agency. This blog is possibly blocked but it does not stop it from defending MCMC from Sokaiya-styled blackmail middle of the year.
The unacceptable issue with Murray is he was in plot with Bloomberg to cast aspersions against the King last year. This is beyond being malicious and no more about free speech.
Recently the law caught up with the Thai-based Australian fugitive to Malaysian law enforcement. He was arrested by Thai authorities at the Bangkok airport on September 29, 2025 based on a warrant related to a defamation criminal defamation case under the Malaysian penal code 499-502.
His passport confiscated, and prevented from leaving Thailand while being faced with criminal defamation case in Thailand, which stems from MCMC's complaint made in Thailand. He could face a maximum penalty of two years' imprisonment and a fine if convicted under Section 328 of the Thai Criminal Code.
Several civil liberties groups have condemned the MCMC's actions. Malaysian NGO Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) and international organization IFEX criticised MCMC for filing a defamation suit against a critic. They claimed it is curbing on free speech. Infringing on an individual's human right acceptable?
While former MACC chief commissioner and more known as human rights activist, Latheefa Koya argued that government agencies should not use taxpayer money to sue members of the public over criticism and should instead issue clarifications.
As lawyer, these activists should know better that defamation can only ascertain upon the freedom of speech has been exercised. There is freedom of speech but once expressed the law takes its course. Criminal defamation is the act of making a false and malicious statement that harms another person's reputation, for which the perpetrator can be charged by the state and face criminal penalties.
Latheefa can save her cop-out argument and Murray can clarify to a judge in court than passing the burden to MCMC to do so. After all they are not out there to make any buck from monetary damages in a civil suit but more concern to upheld their reputation.
Only imprisonment can be a deterrent for this arrogant and cocksure "orang putih" from thinking committing malicious falsehood and destroying the reputation of public figure as justifiable under the pretext of human rights, press freedom and free speech.
An aggrieved party has human rights and their personal freedom too. They should rightly be protected by the law.
As of October 16, 2025, the Shah Alam High Court has found Murray Hunter liable for defamation in a criminal court on the complain from MCMC. He was served court documents but preferred to remain a fugitive in Thailand. MCMC has every right to file for complain in Thailand because he committed the defamatory act in Thailand.
To answer Latheefa, it is acceptable for MCMC to spend public money entrusted to it to save the institution reputation. The question now is why should public money be collected to assist Murray's defense for his malicious intentions.
Latheefa's plea against silencing critic is so predictably rhetorical and unimaginative. It sounded more of desperation than concern for civil liberty.
She and Murray may have least expected MCMC to file their complain in Thailand and cyber offense on Malaysia committed in Thailand is triable on both sides of the border. That should shut her big mouth.
Out of curiosity, was she the person who gave Murray the ideas to target the MCMC Chairman with his criminal defamatory allegations?
She is renown for her malicious intent herself. At MACC, she had made public illegal wire tapping without any court order which is an offense under the Penal Code. She and the law enforcement official who supplied her the material could face imprisonment.
She is her knowledge and expertise as lawyer to break the law than abide by it. Hope Murray squeal the identity of the information provider in the Thai court. It would certainly be an interesting outcome.
No comments:
Post a Comment