Aug 16 verdict on appeal to reinstate sedition suit against Hadi

 

Two practising Christians from Sabah will know on Aug 16 whether they succeed in reinstating their civil action against Abdul Hadi Awang over his alleged seditious statement against followers of the faith.

The veteran politician’s counsel Yusfarizal Yussoff today confirmed with Malaysiakini that the Court of Appeal has set the new date to deliver its decision.

The lawyer explained that the court vacated today's initially scheduled delivery of the decision.

Previously, the court was set to deliver its verdict on March 31. However, that date was then postponed.

The two appellants, Maklin Masiau and Lawrence Jomiji Kinsil @ Maximilhian, are appealing against the Kuala Lumpur High Court's decision to strike out their civil suit.

On May 7 last year, the lower court allowed an application by Hadi - who is also a special envoy to the Middle East with ministerial rank - to strike out the lawsuit.

The Marang MP claimed that the legal action was frivolous, vexatious, and an abuse of the court process.

On Dec 9, 2020, the two Sabahans filed the suit over Hadi’s statement published in PAS’ party organ Harakah on Jan 18, 2016.

The duo claimed that the statement was then reported by the online news portal Free Malaysia Today on the same day. A copy of the news report is being relied on by them for the suit.

They sought a declaration that Hadi has committed an act of sedition contrary to Section 3 of the Sedition Act 1948.

They seek a declaration that the defendant is unfit to hold any position in the government of Malaysia, including that of a position equivalent to a ministerial post.

In their statement of claim, the two plaintiffs alleged that Hadi’s statement had also cast aspersions on the Christian community in Malaysia.

“We respectfully state that the defendant has made an unfounded statement and cast aspersions on Christians and/or Christian missionaries.

“The defendant’s statement has affected the Christian community in the country and has thus become a matter of public interest.

“However, it has been more than four years since the defendant issued this seditious statement, but no prosecution has been brought against the defendant,” the two plaintiffs alleged. - Mkini