Youth and Sports Minister Hannah Yeoh testified that her book “Becoming Hannah” is a personal biography of her journey into politics with no agenda to convert Muslims to Christianity.
The Segambut MP told the Kuala Lumpur High Court that her book has been reprinted 18 times, read by Muslims and non-Muslims, and never been banned by the Home Ministry in spite of a police report lodged.
During the hearing of her defamation suit against Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) lecturer Kamarul Zaman Yusoff over his two Facebook posts, Yeoh rubbished an allegation linking her to an alleged agenda to transform Malaysia into a Christian nation.
“On the pages of ‘Becoming Hannah,’ it is explicitly stated that it is a personal journey. This book has been reprinted many times over the years and was never banned by the Home Ministry.
“Hence, the defendant’s posts were clearly published with the intent to offend, insult, and defame me by portraying me as a politician attempting to spread Christianity through my career in politics.
“Moreover, the defendant’s attitude clearly indicates the fact that he cannot accept that I have a right to practise my religion freely in this country,” Yeoh said in her witness statement regarding Kamarul’s Facebook posting.
Scandalous, controversial, inflammatory
The plaintiff contended that the defendant’s use of the following words - hypocrisy, preaching, using political position, calling fellow Christian members, preacher, persuading, influencing, inciting, mission, and offence - are deliberately scandalous, controversial and inflammatory.
“Moreover, there is no evidence that any Muslim has deviated from his or her faith by reading ‘Becoming Hannah.’ On the contrary, the book has been endorsed by Muslim leaders in the country.
“Further, it is also important to highlight that as a (Selangor state legislature) speaker, I was elected by the Dewan Negeri Selangor which the Head of Islam, His Royal Highness (HRH) Sultan Selangor, is part of.
“As a deputy minister and now minister, both my swearing-in happened before the HRH Yang di-Pertuan Agong, also the Head of Islam of this country,” Yeoh testified.
The plaintiff claimed that the defendant had abused or misused his position as a political analyst to issue false and baseless allegations against her and other DAP leaders.
“Ever since I became a politician, a lot of churches do not want to be associated with a politician, hence in answering the call to serve my country in politics, I did not want to be a preacher anymore,” Yeoh said.
She added that her book was also about Malaysians and their role in nation-building via her sharing her experience in facing challenges and difficulties in her life journey into politics.
Christianisation claim baseless
In today’s proceedings before judge Aliza Sulaiman, Natural Resources and Environmental Sustainability Minister Nik Nazmi Nik Ahmad testified that the Christianisation claim against Yeoh is baseless.
Testifying on behalf of Yeoh, the witness said the plaintiff is a committed Christian who has never allowed her faith to affect her dedication and service to all Malaysians regardless of ethnicity, religion or political background.
“The plaintiff is not a person who uses her position to spread Christianity, rather the plaintiff has introduced many reforms that have allowed Umno in the (Selangor) state assembly to play its role as the opposition at that time.
“Moreover, I have many Christian friends with whom I enjoy discussing our shared and differing beliefs. I find it easier to work with other politicians who are similarly motivated by the positive values of their faith,” Nik Nazmi told the civil court.
The PKR lawmaker pointed out that Yeoh, who was Subang Jaya assemblyperson for two terms, from 2008 to 2018, was a highly respected state representative who consistently worked hard to ensure religious schools in the state constituency received appropriate allocation of funds from the Selangor government.
The Setiawangsa MP testified that Yeoh frequently attended mosque and surau programmes while respecting the places of worship to the extent that MCA criticised her for wearing a scarf in a mosque.
The witness explained that her actions were not reflective of Kamarul’s allegation but clearly showed that she has a genuine dedication to public service and respect for the various religious practices.
“Religious belief is an individual right, and if we do not appreciate non-Muslims questioning the commitment of Muslim leaders in non-Muslim countries, we should also not question the commitment of non-Muslim leaders involved in current issues in our country,” the minister commented.
Nik Nazmi added that he was so disturbed by the claims against Yeoh that he was driven to post his own statement in response on Facebook on May 16, 2017.
Defamation suit
Filed in February 2022, Yeoh’s suit is over Kamarul’s two Facebook posts dated May 10 and 17, 2017.
Incidentally, on May 17, 2017, Kamarul also lodged a police report against Yeoh over her book.
He accused Yeoh, who was then the Selangor speaker, of alleged proselytisation, claiming she was driving a “Christian agenda”.
The first Facebook post was titled “Hannah Yeoh contoh hipokrasi terbesar DAP”, while the second one was “Laporan polis saya terhadap Hannah Yeoh”.
Yeoh claimed that the two Facebook posts were very irresponsible, scandalous, vile and intentionally published by Kamarul to inflame hatred and anger against her.
She contended that he had abused his position as an academic to issue politically driven statements against her.
Through the writ of summons against Kamarul, Yeoh is seeking general, aggravated, and exemplary damages.
She seeks for the lecturer to make an unconditional public retraction of the alleged defamatory statements and an apology.
She also wants a court injunction to prevent him from further publishing any alleged defamatory statements against her.
Justification
However, in his statement of defence, Kamarul raised the defence of justification.
Under Malaysian law for civil action, justification is a defence that the statements or allegations are true, and if proven successful in court, this would act as an absolute defence against the related lawsuit.
In relation to the defence of justification, the senior lecturer claimed that his Facebook post on May 10, 2017, was not referring to Yeoh but to her political party DAP.
Kamarul claimed that the posting was instead about how while DAP was championing secularism that separates politics and religion, there were allegedly also party leaders who were mixing politics and religion.
In also citing justification over his posting on May 17, 2017, Kamarul claimed that his police report was made following Yeoh having lodged her own police report against him in relation to his Facebook post.
The lecturer alleged that his police report was over her book which was a purported attempt to proselytise Christianity to those outside the faith, including Muslims.
‘Not defamatory’
Kamarul also denied his two Facebook posts were defamatory against Yeoh, further dismissing her claim that they were politically motivated.
Kamarul claimed that through the police report, he alleged that Yeoh may have committed an offence under Section 4(1)(a) of Selangor’s Non-Islamic Religions (Control of Propagation Amongst Muslims) Enactment 1988, as well as Section 298(A)(1) of the Penal Code.
Section 4 is in relation to the state law offence of persuading, influencing or inciting a Muslim to change faith.
Section 298A deals with the federal law offence of causing disharmony, disunity, or feelings of enmity, hatred or ill will; or prejudices, or attempts to prejudice, or is likely to prejudice, the maintenance of harmony or unity, on grounds of religion, between persons or groups of persons professing the same or different religions.
Kamarul also cited qualified privilege and fair comment as a further defence against Yeoh’s defamation suit.
Qualified privilege is a defence that applies in a situation where the words were issued by a person who has an interest or a legal, social or moral duty to do so.
The defence of fair comment is one where the impugned statement was made as a fair comment (rather than as a statement of fact) over an issue of public interest.
Previously, Kamarul also sued Yeoh for defamation over her Facebook post. However, he withdrew the civil action earlier this year.
Counsel Sangeet Kaur Deo acted for Yeoh, while lawyer Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz appeared for Kamarul.
Besides today, the trial is also scheduled for Jan 14 next year. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.