THE Court of Appeal today reduced the total damages awarded to former Health Minister Khairy Jamaluddin in his defamation suit against independent preacher Mohd Rasyiq Mohd Alwi, better known as Ustaz Abu Syafiq, from RM2.5 million to RM830,000.
The decision reflects the court’s view that the era of multi-million ringgit awards in defamation cases has passed.
The three-judge panel, led by Appeal Court Judge Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, allowed Rasyiq’s appeal, reducing the general damages from RM2 million to RM500,000.
“The purpose of general damages in defamation is to provide compensation, not to confer extraordinary profit,” Mohamed Zaini said in his judgment, explaining that while the statements were serious, the quantum of damages must align with current judicial trends.
The court maintained the aggravated damages at RM250,000 and reduced exemplary damages from RM250,000 to RM80,000.
Mohamed Zaini was sitting with Appeal Court Judge Datuk Ahmad Fairuz Zainol Abidin and High Court Judge Datuk Ahmad Shahril Mohd Salleh.
The ruling noted that the defamatory statements falsely accused Khairy of dishonesty, fraud, and falsifying COVID-19 vaccination records while he served as Health Minister.
Eight separate publications were identified, each actionable individually, yet the total compensation must reflect careful assessment.
“Even though there is no fixed sum for defamation damages, the amount must be proportionate and consistent with the current judicial trend.
The total RM2.5 million initially awarded for general damages is not in line with contemporary standards. Therefore, we reduce it to RM500,000,” Mohamed Zaini said.
On aggravated and exemplary damages, the court emphasised that Rasyiq’s statements not only harmed Khairy’s reputation but also had potential public impact, possibly discouraging people from receiving COVID-19 vaccines.
The panel noted that the preacher failed to show genuine remorse, and any apology appeared insincere.
“Exemplary damages are punitive and are only awarded in rare cases where the defendant’s conduct was designed to gain material advantage, such as financial or economic benefit,” the judgment explained.
“We recognise that the landscape of defamation has fundamentally changed with the rise of social media platforms like Instagram and Facebook, which enable rapid and wide dissemination of statements.”
The court also stressed the higher standard of responsibility expected from public religious figures. Mohamed Zaini said, “The appellant enjoys a high level of trust, respect, and moral recognition from the public.
“Followers naturally and reasonably accept statements by a preacher as true and morally grounded. Therefore, the appellant has a greater responsibility, not a lesser one, to verify the accuracy of his statements before dissemination.”
The original suit, filed on 25 January 2022, followed claims that Rasyiq posted three videos and images on his Instagram account on 20 October 2021 and 6 and 10 January 2022, alleging Khairy lied about receiving COVID-19 vaccinations and falsified information regarding his vaccination status.
High Court Judge Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin had earlier ruled that the statements, in their natural and ordinary meaning, impugned Khairy’s integrity, suggested dishonourable conduct, and damaged his reputation.
The Court of Appeal’s decision today confirms partial relief for Khairy, while signalling a judicial shift towards more proportionate awards in defamation cases, especially in the social media era. - February 19, 2026
.jpg)
