The manipulated videos of President Obama, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton in 2017 brought to light the 'deepfakes' technology and the opportunity for mischief and abuse of evidence. Forgery has always been the bane of evidence. The unprecedented development of Artificial Intelligence and its use in digital application technologies to create fake images, text, audio and video is perturbing as it calls into question the authenticity of any evidence presented in court. With the continuous advancement in technologies, deepfakes have become so sophisticated and refined that even forensic experts have difficulties in deciphering the fake from the real. This paper examines the issue of deepfakes and the challenges in authenticating audio-video evidence for use in trials. The methodology adopted is a doctrinal study of the available literature on the subject and reported cases. It also recommends a set of authenticating procedures for the admissibility of audio-video evidence so as to establish its credibility in court.

Overview

This case was a decided by Azizah Nawawi J in the High Court Malaya, Kuala Lumpur in Suit Nos: 22IP-43-11-2013 & 22IP-24-05-2014 dated 27 January 2016. The case involved two consolidated suits before Azizah Nawawi J. Following the judicial disposition of Lord Denning MR, if I may, I would like to focus on the ratio decidendi in this case which, in my mind, is quite remarkable because it sets out a new direction where three key areas of the law are closely intertwined: intellectual property (IP), contract and indemnity elements. For this reason, this case has set a marvellous precedent for subsequent cases for judicial compliance purposes.

Never before has the Malaysian Government wielded so much power. Today, the government possesses the right to sue individuals for defamation. This is courtesy of the Federal Court's decision in Chong Chieng Jen. In this article, the author argues that the Court, in rendering its holding, erred in law. The question whether the government has the right to sue for defamation is a jurisdictional one. The answer to that question, contrary to popular belief, does not reside in the common law. Instead, the answer finds its roots in Malaysia's federal defamation statute, the Defamation Act 1957. The Act, however, says nothing about the government's right to sue for defamation. Because that conclusion comes from federal law, the government's suit should have been shot down early in the litigation process. In Part I, the article outlines the procedural posture of the suit. In Part II, the article critically examines the Court's legal reasoning. This is the most crucial section, for it discusses key provisions of the Government Proceedings Act 1956. In Part III, the article explores whether the government may rely upon the substantive elements of defamation to maintain its suit. Part IV briefly explains what the author has tentatively come to term common-law pre-emption of federal law. The article concludes in Part V

Technological advancement has played a considerable role in introducing a new dispute resolution mechanism called electronic arbitration (hereinafter referred to as e-arbitration) to the dispute resolution industry. Therefore, the Malaysian arbitration system must evolve in tandem with the advancement of modern technologies. Based on doctrinal legal research, this article seeks to analyse the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats ('S.W.O.T') of using e-arbitration. It has been discovered that e-arbitration can supplement the Malaysian dispute resolution industry. Moreover, e-arbitration's weaknesses and threats only relate to operational and initial implementation issues. Finally, it is concluded that the Malaysian Government should strengthen its dispute resolution legal framework with e-arbitration.

SINGAPORE
Employment
Huge pay bumps and flexi work policies: How Singapore companies are fighting the war for talent
In a normal year, lawyers at one of Singapore’s top four local law firms could expect to receive an annual increment of between 10% and 15%. The company said employees would get a larger increment this year, one former employee told CNBC. His salary jumped by 40% and the increase was not tied to a promotion, the person said. That law firm isn’t the only company in Singapore adjusting compensation packages in a hot labor market. Southeast Asia’s largest lender DBS told CNBC it increased salaries across the bank in mid-2021. Accounting company KPMG announced in May that the firm will spend 25 million Singapore dollars ($18.23 million) on salary increments.

SINGAPORE
Employment
Rising cost of living sending Johoreans back to Singapore
The majority of locals who returned to Johor when the border with Singapore was closed due to the Covid-19 pandemic, have gone back to the island republic. Johor business groups say the locals decided to seek employment in Singapore again for various reasons, including the rising cost of living in Malaysia. Johor Indian Muslim Entre-preneur Association (Perusim) secretary Hussein Ibrahim said only a small group of people remained in Johor.

MALAYSIA
Employment
Government opens up more sectors for foreign workers from India
Malaysia has agreed to open up more sectors for foreign workers from India, says Human Resources Minister Datuk Seri M. Saravanan. “Recently, the Home Affairs Ministry and Human Resources Ministry joint committee have approved other sectors,” he said briefly while answering questions from lawmakers during the tabling of the Employees' Social Security (Amendment) 2022 Bill in the Dewan Rakyat on Thursday (July 21).