KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here has awarded businessman Datuk Seri Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak RM550,000 in damages in his defamation suit against Port Dickson Bersatu chief Badrul Hisham Shaharin and YouTube channel owner, Nurpais Ismail, over a video last year.
Judicial Commissioner Arziah Mohamed Apandi ordered Badrul Hisham, or better known as Chegubard, and Nurpais to pay Farhash RM300,000 in general damages, RM150,000 in aggravated damages and RM100,000 in exemplary damages.
She also ordered Badrul Hisham and Nurpais to pay RM40,000 in costs to Farhash.
Farhash, 44, was absent from the proceedings here on Thursday (Jan 29). He was represented by lawyer Nurin Husnina Hussein.
Badrul Hisham, 48, and Nurpais, 46, both did not enter appearance in the case.
In her decision, JC Arziah said the statements made by Badrul Hisham against Farhash were serious and defamatory while Nurpais, who published the recorded interview with a sensational title on his channel, encouraged the damaging statements for commercial gain.
The JC said that Badrul Hisham was aware that his remarks was not made in a private conversation and would be broadcasted to a wide audience while Nurpais, who had full editorial control over the material, had put on a sensational video title to maximise viewership.
The court also found that despite receiving Farhash’s letter of demand in May last year, neither defendants took any steps to remove the video or mitigate the harm and this showed their persistence in defamation.
The JC also said that it was undeniable that the defamatory statements referred to Farhash as his name was repeatedly mentioned in the video and Badrul Hisham provided identifying details, including Farhash's role as Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s former political secretary and former Perak PKR state leader.
The decision was delivered after a day of full trial on Jan 12 where the plaintiff (Farhash) testified.
The plaintiff filed the lawsuit in May 26, last year, claiming that the first defendant had made and published defamatory statements against him during an interview conducted by the second defendant on May 7, 2025, which was uploaded to the second defendant’s YouTube account.
The defamatory statements, among other things, implied that the plaintiff used his position to control and manipulate large companies, and that the plaintiff was involved in corruption and misuse of political influence and improper dealings linked to government contracts.
