KUALA LUMPUR: The trial of a suit by Primary Industries Minister, Teresa Kok Suh Sim (pix) against Selangor PAS Youth chief Syarhan Humaizi Abdul Halim on the publishing of articles in his Facebook account, which started Tuesday, was concluded after two witnesses gave their statements.
The two witnesses, were Kok, who was the plaintiff, who gave her statement on Tuesday while Syarhan, namely, the defendant, gave his statement in the High Court here yesterday.
High Court Judge Datuk Mohd Firuz Jaffril ordered both parties to fine their written arguments on Nov 8 and Nov 29.
“The court also fixed Dec 4 for clarification,“ he said after hearing the witness statement. Lawyer S.N. Nair, represented Kok, who is also Seputeh Member of Parliament, while Wan Rohimi Wan Daud represented Syarhan.
Earlier, during the cross-examination by Nair, on how Syarhan obtained Ustaz Khalil’s (PAS Youth chief, Muhammad Khalil Abd Hadi) speech, the Selangor PAS Youth chief said that he obtained it from Youtube.
Nair: Did ustaz make a transcript (speech)?
Syarhan: (I) did not.
Syarhan also agreed with Nair that if (Khalil’s) speech text was provided it would be easy for the people to view the speech delivered.
In her suit, which was filed on Feb 4, Kok referred to Syarhan’s article on Facebook on Jan 19, 2019 under the title “Ustaz Khalil’s Speech Is True: DAP Don’t Be Uncouth”.
Kok also referred to the second article titled “Teresa Kok Does Not Agree Islam Is The Official Federal Religion” which she claimed the defended uploaded and was published by the Malaysian portal Today on Jan 12.
The plaintiff claimed what was written in the two articles, namely, that she was anti-Islam, racist, abusing her power as Cabinet minister, unethical and could not be trusted.
Koh sought general damages, aggravated and exemplary damages and an injunction to prevent the defendant or his agents from republishing the articles.
The plaintiff also sought interests, costs and other costs deemed fit by the court.
Syarhan in his statement of defence which was filed on Mar 29 claimed that the first article published was based on facts and was a reasonable political response towards DAP and was not slanderous in nature.
Syarhan also claimed he had never published the second article, adding that the article had nothing to do with Kok. — Bernama
