Lim Guan Eng’s Defamation Suit Dismissed by Court of Appeal – Summary
Introduction: A Political Defamation Case
In a decision delivered on 25 February 2025, the Court of Appeal of Malaysia dismissed former Finance Minister Lim Guan Eng’s defamation lawsuit against Datuk Tan Teik Cheng and Star Media Group Berhad (Citation: [2025] CLJU 388). The case centered on allegedly defamatory statements published during the Johor State Election 2022, involving claims that Lim imposed a condition to rename a Chinese vernacular school in exchange for a government grant.
This case attracted national attention due to its political implications and the personalities involved—Lim Guan Eng from DAP (Pakatan Harapan) and Datuk Tan from MCA (Barisan Nasional).
Background: The SJKC Kuek Ho Yao Naming Controversy
The controversy began when the name of Sekolah Jenis Kebangsaan Cina (SJKC) Kuek Ho Yao was allegedly in flux due to changes in the development plans by private developers, first UM Land and later Eco World. Public confusion ensued when news outlets reported that the new developer might influence the school’s name, raising suspicions and community backlash.
In 2019, a closed-door meeting between Ministry officials and the family of the late Tan Sri Kuek Ho Yao agreed to a revised name: SJKC Kuek Ho Yao @ Eco Spring. However, this name change was not publicly disclosed at the time.
The Allegations and Media Coverage
During the 2022 Johor State Election, Datuk Tan Teik Cheng published a press statement—later carried by The Star Online—accusing Lim Guan Eng of political interference. The core allegations were:
- Lim allocated RM4 million in school funds as Finance Minister,
- The allocation was allegedly conditional upon renaming the school,
- Lim had failed to deny this publicly.
The publication, posted as a “Letter to the Editor,” ignited further public scrutiny.
High Court Decision: Statements Not Defamatory
The High Court dismissed the claim, holding that:
- The impugned statements were not capable of defamatory meaning,
- The defence of fair comment and reportage was made out,
- There was no malice proven on the part of the defendants,
- The article was a call for clarification, not an accusation.
Lim Guan Eng then appealed to the Court of Appeal.
Court of Appeal: Affirmation of High Court Ruling
The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court’s decision. Key findings included:
- Statements Not Defamatory: The Court concluded that a reasonable reader would interpret the statements as political opinion or commentary—not outright allegations.
- Context Matters: The article was published during an election campaign and was labeled clearly as a “Letter to the Editor,” allowing for public response.
- Fair Comment Defence Succeeds: The statements were based on true underlying facts, including:
- Lim’s public acknowledgment of the RM4 million allocation.
- The ongoing public dispute over the school’s name.
- The lack of denial by Lim at the time of publication.
- Reportage Defence Applies: The Star merely reported the fact that the MCA Vice President made the statement, without adopting the allegations as its own. This neutral reporting qualified as privileged reportage.
- No Malice Proven: Political rivalry alone does not prove malice. There was no evidence that the statements were made dishonestly or recklessly.
Damages Would Have Been Capped at RM150,000
While the appeal was dismissed entirely, the Court noted that even if Lim had succeeded, damages would have been capped at RM150,000 due to:
- Limited reach of the article (behind a paywall),
- No application for injunction,
- Lim’s continued political success post-publication (winning a parliamentary seat and becoming DAP Chairman).
Legal Significance: A Milestone for Free Speech and Political Commentary
This ruling is a notable precedent in Malaysian defamation law. It reaffirms:
- The importance of freedom of political expression, especially during elections,
- The courts’ objective approach to determining whether statements are defamatory,
- That media platforms are protected when neutrally publishing opinions from public figures,
- The necessity of public interest and factual basis in invoking fair comment.
Conclusion: Upholding Reason, Context, and Public Interest
The Court of Appeal’s ruling in Lim Guan Eng v. Datuk Tan Teik Cheng & Star Media Group is a balanced decision that strengthens media freedom, recognizes legitimate political discourse, and underscores the judiciary’s commitment to evaluating defamation claims objectively and contextually.
This case also serves as a cautionary tale for public figures: political criticism—especially when based on public facts—may not always cross into defamation.
Consult Us For More Information!
🌐 Call us: 03-2202 1021 / 017-6965 966 (WhatsApp)
📩 Email Us: nick@jykolaw.com
Or fill in the contact form CLICK HERE
Disclaimer: The above proposition is subject to actual facts and circumstances and shall never be referred as the actual law without seeking legal advice. Consult us for more information!