Veteran DAP trio win defamation case against PAS MP

The High Court orders Siti Mastura Muhammad to pay a total of RM750,000 in damages for linking them to the late Chin Peng.

(FMT) – PAS MP Siti Mastura Muhammad has lost a defamation case brought by DAP leaders Lim Kit Siang, Lim Guan Eng and Teresa Kok over her claims linking them to the late Communist Party of Malaya leader Chin Peng.

The High Court here ordered Siti Mastura to pay a total of RM750,000 in damages to the DAP trio, specifically RM300,000 to Kit Siang, RM250,000 to Guan Eng and RM200,000 to Kok.

Justice Quay Chew Soon also imposed a 5% annual interest if the Kepala Batas MP fails to pay the amounts and also ordered her to pay costs of RM25,000 each to the three DAP leaders.

Quay ruled that Siti Mastura’s remarks, made during a 2023 speech in Kemaman and circulated on social media, were defamatory and lacked evidence.

He ordered her to stop publishing, or sharing the defamatory statements or anything similar about Kit Siang, Guan Eng, and Kok, saying this was to protect the plaintiffs’ reputations.

The judge said the Kepala Batas MP acted with malice and that her defence of fair comment did not hold water.

‘Lee Kuan Yew, Chin Peng link uttered to provoke anger’

“The defendant has made inflammatory remarks linking the plaintiffs to a prohibited political party and one of its infamous leaders (Chin Peng).

“The insinuation that the plaintiffs are affiliated with and support communism in our country is considered taboo. A reasonable person will understand the sinister insinuation, and it carries considerable stigma,” he said.

Quay said Siti used the late Lee Kuan Yew’s name to make her allegations seem more credible, but the claims were baseless. He found that these claims, along with the Chin Peng link, unfairly suggested the DAP leaders were tied to harmful ideologies.

He said linking the plaintiffs to the late Singaporean premier implied they (the plaintiffs) were part of a conspiracy against Malaysia’s values, which could provoke public anger. He said the statements were reckless and said they went beyond political criticism, and crossed into defamation.

Quay said Siti’s defence that her remarks were made at a closed-door setting but were inadvertently spread was also a weak argument as she was delivering a ceramah.

“Whether or not the statements were made in a private setting does not diminish the potential for defamation. Its damaging nature still has the capacity to harm the plaintiffs’ reputation among those who heard it,” he said.

‘PhD holder, but chose to release unfounded information’

Quay said the reliance on an alleged Barisan Nasional book was also unacceptable as it was a “phantom” publication. He said the defence also failed to call the alleged maker of the book to testify, which led to the book being a mere “hearsay document” during the trial.

“The campaign book lacks veracity and cannot be considered credible. Its origin remains a mystery. A top official from Umno was unaware of the campaign book and its publication remains unverified.

“The campaign book lacks veracity, with no year of publication, author, publisher or ISBN/ISSN number, and cannot be considered reliable.

“Despite holding a PhD and having cognisance of good practices outlined in research methodology, the defendant chose to disseminate unfounded information based solely on the BN campaign book,” he said.

‘You could have asked Guan Eng, Teresa Kok if they were related to Chin Peng’

Quay said Siti, being in the same lower house as Guan Eng and Kok in Parliament, should have sought clarification directly from them before making such remarks.

“By avoiding inquiries to ascertain the truth, the defendant failed to fact-check her statements adequately.

“While public interest in political debate is recognised, it does not grant her carte blanche to make misleading statements that damage another person’s reputation,” he said.

In deciding on the quantum of damages, Quay said he decided to give Kit Siang the highest amount of RM300,000 as he was the most senior politician in the suit, and given that he is a well-known figure and was bestowed Tan Sri-ship by the King.

Defence lawyer Yusfarizal Yusoff, when asked if Siti would appeal, said he would look into the full grounds of judgment before advising his client.

Sankara Nair appeared for the plaintiffs.