The Wall Street Journal claimed that the money trail shows that some US$700 million were moved between government agencies, banks and companies before it ended up in Najib’s accounts. — File pic

KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 5 — A lawyer acting for Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in his proposed lawsuit against the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) confirmed today that Dow Jones & Company replied last week to his client's letter, but said the publisher did not state what law it planned to invoke in its defence.

Speaking to Malay Mail Online via WhatsApp, lawyer Datuk Mohd Hafarizam Harun said although the response from Messrs Rodyk & Davidson LLP arrived within the 15-day deadline that expired on September 30, it did not adequately answer his client's queries.

Instead, he said lawyers acting for Dow Jones said their client will not reveal how it plans on proceeding with its defence, if and should Najib sue WSJ for defamation over the US-based paper’s articles on state investment firm 1 Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).

“Their response, essentially does not answer affirmatively whether WSJ will or will not invoke US SPEECH Act save and except that WSJ's lawyers stated their clients will not '...advance concessions regarding which defences it may choose to rely on',” Hafarizam told Malay Mail Online.

The Umno lawyer then declined to reveal Najib's next step, citing client confidentiality.

Earlier this morning, a spokesman for Dow Jones informed Malay Mail Online via email that in its reply “early last week” to Najib's legal team, it said that it will continue to stand by the accuracy of its articles on 1MDB.

The spokesman did not expressly state, however, if the firm planned on invoking for its defence the SPEECH Act, a federal statutory law in the US that may render any judgment in a defamation suit mounted by the prime minister unenforceable there.

Last week, Hafarizam told reporters that the latest letter to Dow Jones was to find out if the US-based publisher would use the SPEECH Act, or the Securing the Protection of our Enduring and Established Constitutional Heritage (SPEECH) Act, a law that protects Americans from libel action outside the country.

According to the Umno lawyer, without a response from Dow Jones on the matter, he was unable to advise the prime minister on whether he should proceed with his plan to sue WSJ.

Hafarizam also said his client would not take the futile move of suing WSJ in Malaysia if the publication chooses to invoke the law as the SPEECH Act essentially stipulates that judgments against the publication here that are deemed inconsistent with US free speech laws would render the punishments unenforceable in the US.

He also said the only way his client can circumvent the SPEECH Act – if invoked – is to prove that media freedom and judicial independence in Malaysia is on par with the US.

In an article on July 2, WSJ, citing documents from Malaysian investigators scrutinising 1MDB’s financials, said a money trail showed that almost US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) had been channelled into what appeared to be the prime minister’s personal accounts.

The report said, however, that the source of the funds was unknown although it noted that it was the first time that Najib had been linked to the probe on the troubled state investor.

Following WSJ’s July 2 report and a subsequent July 6 opinion piece on the same matter, Najib’s lawyers said the prime minister may sue the publication for defamation.