Abstract
AbstractThe rise in defamation claims in Malaysia has placed an onerous workload on the courts to deal with such matters. Against this backdrop, Hamid Sultan Abu Backer JC (as his Lordship then was) (Hamid Sultan JC) suggested in two separate High Court decisions that to alleviate the courts’ burden, matters pertaining to libel and slander ought to be constrained to the criminal courts through appropriate statutory amendments, including to the Criminal Procedure Code (Malaysia). In this paper, the author cautions against the learned Hamid Sultan JC's recommendations and proffers an alternative proposal in the form of media arbitration schemes to handle the growing influx of defamation claims. In particular, the salient features of the IMPRESS and IPSO Schemes from the United Kingdom are scrutinized in detail and measured in terms of suitability for a potential arbitration scheme in the Malaysian jurisdiction.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Reference3 articles.
1. Offensive Statements on Social Networking Platforms with the special reference to Cyber Defamation: A Comparative Analysis between Malaysia and Bangladesh;Alam;Journal of Asian and African Social Science and Humanities,2015
2. A Comparative Legal Analysis of Online Defamation in Malaysia, Singapore and the United Kingdom
3. Arbitration for the Afflicted – The Viability of Arbitrating Defamation and Libel Claims considering IPSO's Pilot Program;Altheide;Journal of Dispute Resolution,2017