KUALA LUMPUR: After a tumultuous year in Malaysian politics, with emerging scandals and allegations all around, a slate of high-profile defamation cases will soon unravel in the courts and in the public eye.

When defamation suits come into focus, most would recall the Kuala Lumpur High Court's 1994 decision to award an astounding RM10 million in damages to corporate giant Tan Sri Vincent Tan who sued veteran journalist M G G Pillai and others for libel.

Many view the landmark decision as a dangerous precedent which effectively opened the gates for staggering claims for alleged injury to reputation.

Whenever a defamation suit is filed, journalists would note the millions of ringgit claimed as damages and ask lawyers, "Why so much?"

Most of the time, counsels would smile and remind the press that their clients are "not just anybody" and have a reputation to defend against "baseless allegations".

The Kuala Lumpur High Court recently ruled in favour of Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, in his suit against the New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd (NSTP) and its former group editor-in-chief Tan Sri Abdullah Ahmad over the article "Anwar's link to US lobbyist" published in the New Straits Times on March 2, 2002.

The court, however, only awarded RM100,000 in compensatory damages to Anwar, a mere speck of the RM100 million in damages sought.

Judicial Commissioner Harmindar Singh Dhaliwal, in his Nov 25 decision, also ticked off the former deputy prime minister for "gross exaggeration" in suggesting the damages he was entitled to.

"Even in the most serious cases of defamation... I cannot imagine general damages to exceed the quantum that is usually awarded in personal injury claims to a claimant who is fully paralysed. The principle in damages is that it is compensatory and not a path to untold riches," Harmindar ruled.

In the horizon, there are at least three mammoth defamation cases with the damages claimed totalling RM1.25 billion.

Tomorrow, the Shah Alam High Court is expected to hear a RM250 million defamation suit filed by former senator and former MTUC president Datuk Zainal Rampak against The Sun Media Corp and four others.

According to The Malay Mail, Zainal's suit is over an article entitled "Shut up or step down, Zainal told", which was published in theSun on Sept 6, 2000.

Next Monday, the Kuala Lumpur High Court is set to hear a mention of Transport Minister Datuk Seri Ong Tee Keat's RM500 million defamation suit against Kuala Dimensi Sdn Bhd (KDSB) CEO Datuk Seri Tiong King Sing.

Tiong had alleged that he gave the MCA president RM10 million, a claim Ong has cast as a bid to prevent a fair investigation into the controversial Port Klang Free Zone (PKFZ) project and KDSB, the project's turnkey contractor.

Tiong, who is Bintulu member of parliament, recently filed a defamation suit against Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M) president Datuk Paul Low over the organisation's Global Corruption Report 2009, which highlighted the PKFZ scandal.

Following the intense furore and debates about the RM4.6 billion project, a series of PKFZ-related law suits are expected to be heard next year as the cases get called up for hearing.

KDSB is understood to have filed defamation suits against other individuals and several news organisations over reports on the PKFZ controversy.

The other RM500 million defamation suit expected to be heard next year was filed in September by business tycoon P Thiagarajan against the CEO of Maika Holdings Vell Paari, Tamil Nesan Sdn Bhd and the newspaper's editor-in-chief K Pathmanabhan.

In his suit, Thiagarajan is accusing Vell, who is also the managing director of Tamil Nesan Sdn Bhd, for implicating the former in the death of lawyer P Selvarani.

Anwar appears to lead the pack with about eight suits pending, against former home minister Tan Sri Syed Hamid Albar, Deputy Education Minister Datuk Wee Ka Siong, Malaysian Indian United Party (MIUP) president Datuk S Nallakaruppan and former Parti Keadilan deputy president Chandra Muzaffar, among others.

Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Musa Hassan had also filed a defamation suit against Anwar over the latter's police report on Musa's alleged role in fabricating evidence in the 1998 "black eye" incident, where Anwar was assaulted while in police custody.

The Kuala Lumpur High Court has fixed Feb 15, 2010 to mention Anwar's RM100 million defamation suit against Foreign Minister Datuk Seri Anifah Aman, and set Jan 19 next year for case management of Anwar's RM10 million defamation suit against Deputy Minister of Plantation Industries and Commodities Datuk Hamzah Zainuddin.

Legal action ensued after Anifah alleged, during a press conference in Washington on May 16, that Anwar had enticed him to join Pakatan Rakyat (PR) by offering him the post of deputy prime minister if PR succeded in forming the federal government.

Meanwhile, Anwar is suing Hamzah was over the latter's allegations that Anwar had harassed Hamzah's wife in 1998.

Another case of interest expected to be heard next year is Selangor Menteri Besar Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim's two defamation suits against former Selangor menteri besar Datuk Seri Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo over the latter's allegations of abuse of power by Khalid.

DAP national chairman Karpal Singh and Selangor state executive council member Teresa Kok have filed defamation suits against Utusan Melayu (M) Bhd over several articles published in the Malay language daily.

In arriving at a decision in defamation suits, judges would have to grapple with the competing demands of freedom of expression, right to reputation and media freedom. However, the end decision may not always be a win-win situation for all parties.

Centre for Independent Journalism executive director V Gayathry said the "mega damages" sought in defamation suits were problematic because it did not rectify the main grievances involving reputation.

In a telephone interview with The Edge Financial Daily, Gayathry said it was clear that defamation suits had the worrying effect of stifling the media's role and that legal action should not be the first recourse for aggrieved persons as they could approach the media organisations involved.

"Also, it's important for politicians to be accountable, accountable to their constituents and not just sue for the sake of it," Gayathry said, noting the example of the PKFZ project where it was in public interest for the matter to be reported.