No proof FKNK lost members to rivals in Facebook defamation

Malta’s two hunting lobby groups fought it out in a courtroom over an allegedly defamatory Facebook comment, which saw the claim filed by the FKNK against ‘rivals’ Kaċċaturi San Ubertu thrown out.

Chief hunting lobby FKNK, through CEO Lino Farrugia and President Lucas Micallef, sued for libel KSU head Mark Mifsud Bonnici, over a Facebook comment published by the latter on a third party’s personal profile page.

The allegation was that after the government had declared Qawra Point a natural reserve in response to the umpteenth case of poaching, Mifsud Bonnici alleged that the decision was a ‘set-off’ against the proposed designation of Miżieb and Mellieħa’s l-Aħrax as hunting reserves.

The FKNK’s bosses sued for defamation, claiming there had been no such negotiations as alleged, nor had they desired that Qawra Point no longer be used for hunting.

But Lino Farrugia went further, claiming rather specifically that as the financial controller of the FKNK, the audited accounts had shown that the hunting federation had lost revenues from departing members.

But Farrugia never supplied the accounts to prove his claim of forfeited membership dues, to prove that FKNK members had ‘defected’ over to the St Hubert fraternity.

In fact, the Court said that as a non-profit organisation, the FKNK could not qualify as a plaintiff under Maltese defamation law, because the Media and Defamation Act applies to individuals or for-profit societies. “A body corporate cannot suffer damages in its social relations or emotional status through defamatory statements but can suffer financial losses by a decrease in the value of its assets, or goodwill, which ultimately mean a loss in profits,” Magistrate Rachel Montebello said.

The Court said, “the requirement that serious financial loss must be caused or be likely, recognises that such bodies, unlike human beings, can only be damaged in their pocket and consequently an injury must sound in money.”

Since the FKNK was a non-profit, it could not suffer financial loses, or goodwill or financial depreciation. “Even if a defamatory statement was made, this could not be an actionable claim for the FKNK at law,” the Court said.

Additionally, the Court found that Mifsud Bonnici’s allegation was not, in the mind of any right-thinking person, impugning the FKNK with irregular conduct. “Liability for libel does not depend on the intention of the defamer, but on the fact of defamation,” Montebello said, citing the perennial Gatley On Libel And Slander.

The magistrate added that the FKNK could not successfully argue that the allegation shows they had “conspired” with the government to the detriment of their members.

“The Court does not think this is either realistic or objectively deducible by the reasonable and ordinary reader.”

Montebello went on to say that “right-thinking members of the public understand that a balance and compromise must be achieved between the conflicting interests of hunters on one side, and environmental conservation on the other. This means that in the eyes of the public, the declaration of Qawra Point as a natural reserve could not be perceived as some act of betrayal towards FKNK members.”