Court bins Farhash's ad interim injunction bid against MalaysiaNow

Court bins Farhash's ad interim injunction bid against MalaysiaNow


Published: Aug 26, 2025 5:55 PM
Updated: 7:55 PM


The Shah Alam High Court dismissed former Farhash Wafa Salvador Rizal Mubarak’s and other plaintiffs’ application for an ad interim injunction to bar MalaysiaNow from producing articles on him, pending a hearing of the injunction bid on Thursday.

“Pending the resolution of the hearing, the plaintiffs made an oral application for an ad interim injunction.

“The court rejected the said oral application,” said counsel Rajesh Nagarajan in a statement today.

Rajesh, together with Amanda Sonia Mathew, is representing the news portal and editor Abd Ar-Rahman Koya.

When contacted, Rajesh said he told the court that the ad interim injunction is not needed as MalaysiaNow’s last article on the matter was published on July 24.

“And I told the court that freedom of expression is a constitutional right, which the judge agreed,” he told Malaysiakini.

On Aug 21, Farhash (above) and two others filed a defamation suit against MalaysiaNow and Rahman, demanding RM10 million in damages over articles on the Sabah mining scandal.

Court documents sighted by Malaysiakini found that the suit was filed by Messrs Ahmad Deniel, Ruben & Co at the Shah Alam High Court on July 30.

Farhash, along with Bumi Suria Sdn Bhd and Aminudin Mustapha, named MNow Sdn Bhd and Rahman as defendants.

Farhash and Aminudin are the directors of Bumi Suria.

Other damages

Apart from the RM10 million, the plaintiffs are also seeking aggravated, exemplary, and punitive damages, the court’s order for the defendants to publish a full, unconditional, and public apology on the portal, as well as five percent interest per annum, alongside other remedies deemed fit by the court.

Farhash and the two others are also demanding that the defendants delete the published articles from the MalaysiaNow website, and have also filed for an urgent injunction to stop the portal from reproducing the alleged defamatory articles.

In their supporting affidavits, the plaintiffs said the alleged defamatory articles had tainted Farhash’s status as a well-known and respected public figure and Aminudin’s career and business relationships.

The articles, they claimed, depicted them as having abused their positions to obtain a mining licence illegally.