Former deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has filed a defamation suit against former prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin over the allegation that he had sought the latter’s help to settle or postpone his court cases.
According to a report by Bernama, Zahid named Muhyiddin as the sole defendant. According to his statement of claim, Zahid said that on 19 October 2018, he was charged at the Sessions Court here with 12 counts of breach of trust, eight counts of corruption, and 27 counts of money laundering, all of which were tried in High Court.
Despite his court cases, he said Muhyiddin had went in the 15th Johor state election campaign trail in Mersing on 13 February, made a defamatory statement with ill intention against him.
“On the same day, the video footage of the defamatory statement was published on Astro Awani YouTube channel managed by Astro Awani. The video, which lasted two hours 35 minutes and eight seconds (2:35:08), can be accessed on the Internet,” he said.
The Bagan Datuk MP also claimed that Muhyiddin’s statement implied that he had used a “shortcut” to settle and postpone his ongoing court cases.
Zahid said this include him asking for Muhyiddin’s help to intervene in the court cases and the judiciary system, to order the dissolution of the Johor State Assembly and also implied that he was not a respectable and exemplary leader.
With this, Zahid claimed that the allegations were false and aimed at tarnishing his good name and reputation.
“As such, it was clear that the statement was made with ill intention to influence and tarnish the reputation his reputation as the top leader of Barisan Nasional, and indirectly give a bad image to the coalition contesting in the Johor state election.” he said.
Zahid is seeking general, aggravated and exemplary damages, and a public apology from Muhyiddin published in newspapers, and other reliefs and costs deemed fit by the court.
In addition, Zahid also filed a notice for the defendant to withdraw the defamatory statement or similar defamatory statement against him.
He also filed for an interim injunction order to restrain the defendant and his representatives from issuing, publishing, and distributing such a defamatory statement on any social media platforms including Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and WhatsApp.
There was another interim injunction order for defendant to delete, edit and stop the publication of part of the video footage which contained the defamatory statement in online news portals and social media platforms.
What do you think about this? Share your thoughts!