WASHINGTON (Legal Newsline) - A man whom President Donald Trump described as the `Pakistani mystery man’ at the center of conservative conspiracy theories about fraud and information leaks at the U.S. House of Representatives can sue the publisher of a book that accused him of a wide variety of crimes.
Imran Awan and his family are not “limited-purpose public figures” required to meet a higher standard of proof under an anti-SLAPP law designed to protect the media against harassing lawsuits, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled. Salem Media Group argued its 2019 book “Obstruction of Justice: How the Deep State Risked National Security to Protect the Democrats” merely repeated allegations widely circulated by conservative voices including Trump, Sean Hannity and Geraldo Rivera.
“Publishers cannot rely on other people’s defamation to claim a change in the plaintiff’s status,” the appeals court ruled in a Sept. 7 decision. “Nor are publishers who come along after those who first cover the same story entitled to greater protection from liability.”
Imran Awan, Abid Awan, Jamal Awan, Tina Alvi, and Rao Abbas were employed as computer support staff at the House of Representatives when they were investigated for improprieties including security and procurement irregularities. Luke Rosiak, a reporter with Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller, named several of the Awans in a story in February 2017 about the investigation.
A few months later Imran Awan was arrested for making a false statement on a home-loan application. Sean Hannity and Geraldo Rivera discussed the investigations on a Fox News television show segment where Riviera said Imran was a “corrupt I.T. guy” who “has all of the passcodes” and “has all of the information” and asked if he could have been the one who leaked the Democratic National Committee’s emails to WikiLeaks.
President Donald Trump later tweeted about the “Pakistani mystery man” and said the “Rigged Witch Hunt … should look into … the Pakistani Fraudster.”
Imran pleaded guilty to making a false statement on a loan document in 2018. The plea agreement included a statement from the government that investigators found no evidence of wrongdoing related to his work for the House of Representatives. The sentencing judge said the government statement was “extraordinary” and described “baseless accusations” made against the Awans by “the highest branches of government.”
In January 2019 Salem published Rosiak’s book “Obstruction of Justice,” with Imran’s photo on the cover. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich supplied a blurb urging “every American who is concerned about corruption in Washington” to read it. In January 2020, the Aswans sued the Daily Caller, Rosiak and Salem, citing allegedly defamatory statements including that Imram “hacked the House,” solicited a bribe from another IT staffer and “used money he earned in Congress to pay police in Pakistan to torture his enemies.”
Salem and Rosiak filed anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation) motions in June 2020. A trial judge agreed the book dealt with a matter of public interest, but that the Awans were likely to succeed on their defamation claims, in part because they were not public figures. Only Salem appealed the order, but the D.C. Court of Appeals affirmed on the central question of whether the case should be dismissed.
Salem argued the Awans were limited-purpose public figures because they were involuntarily thrust into public view and spoke to the media about the accusations against them. “Engagement with the media simply in order to respond to defamatory statements is not enough,” the appeals court ruled, however. Even their lawyers’ comments about anti-Muslim bias didn’t cross the line into attempts to “influence broader issues of public concern,” the court said.
“The Awans cite multiple instances in which President Trump either publicly referred to someone named `Awan’ or someone connected to the House IT scandal with reference to that person’s Pakistani background, using phrases such as the `Pakistani mystery man’ and `Pakistani fraudster,’” the court said.
The court rejected comparisons to another case involving a trio of Russian businessmen who had “longstanding and widespread access” to the media including hundreds of pages of news articles and personal interviews on a wide range of subjects.
The court dismissed claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and unjust enrichment but allowed the defamation claims to proceed. The Aswans were represented by Deepak Gupta.