The Court of Appeal has ordered the Home Minister and the ministry's secretary-general to pay damages for the suspension order issued against The Edge Communications Sdn Bhd from July 23 to Sept 21 last year.

The suspension order was issued by the minister following a series of articles published by the The Edge Weekly and The Edge Financial Daily over 1MDB.

A three-member bench led by Justice Mohd Zawawi Mohd Salleh today dismissed the appeal by the Home Ministry on damages which senior federal counsel Alice Loke had submitted the publication was not entitled to.

The unanimous decision also saw the court accepting the submission by counsel Darryl Goon representing The Edge that damages can be awarded based on Order 53(5) of the Rules of Court.

This, the senior lawyer submitted, was for misfeasance in public office and constitutional damages, which led to violation of the media's rights to freedom of speech and expression under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.

"We are not with you (Loke) and we have to dismiss the appeal. The respondents have passed the threshold (in the award of damages) under Order 53(5).

"No order is made as to costs," said Justice Zawawi who presided with Justice Abdul Rahman Sebli and Justice Prasad Sandosham Abraham.

Based on the decision, the parties would now need to go back to High Court for the assessment of damages.

Last year, Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Asmabi Mohamad (now a Court of Appeal judge) allowed The Edge's judicial review application to challenge the minister's order which issued the suspension following a series of articles regarding 1MDB.

The judge ruled that the decision by the Home Minister to suspend the financial papers was full of illegality and irrationality, and breached the rule of natural justice.

Justice Asmabi said the ministry did not furnish particulars to The Edge on which articles they were referring to in the show-cause letter, which the publication was given seven days to reply.

May open the floodgates

Loke submitted that The Edge was not entitled to seek damages as this was an application for judicial review, and if damages were awarded it may open the floodgates where people may seek such awards for decisions made by the minister.

“The minister has the discretion under the Publication and Printing Presses Act 1984 to make the suspension order. There is no malice or allegation of malice in the order, as there were no such submission or notion made by The Edge,” she said.

“How is a minister going to make decisions if they are subjected to private law actions? This will open the floodgates."

She said the appellants were not appealing to lift the suspension as it became academic.

Meanwhile, Goon submitted that The Edge was entitled to damages citing a case authority which decided that damages can be awarded for “reckless indifference” and misfeasance in public office.

The public officer, he said, acted in illegality when issuing the show-cause letter and the minister should have at least enquired as to why the suspension order was issued.

“The failure (of the minister) to enquire in the face of an express requirement showed the recklessness,” Goon submitted.

The senior lawyer said they were called for a meeting by the Home Ministry but were never furnished with details as to what it was all about. Despite this, the ministry issued the suspension order.

Goon appeared with Raja Eileen Soraya Raja Aman for The Edge.