/file/1330/6cc371ca0c9a23ba5466df632bef74d0.jpeg)
Charles told to apologise, court says Zakir's speech can 'cause tensions'
The civil court ordered Charles Santiago today to apologise to Islamic preacher Zakir Naik over the former Klang MP's 2019 public statement linked to the defunct militant group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
The directed apology came on the heels of the High Court in Kuala Lumpur this morning finding Charles (above) having defamed the plaintiff in the latter's defamation suit against the former...
The civil court ordered Charles Santiago today to apologise to Islamic preacher Zakir Naik over the former Klang MP's 2019 public statement linked to the defunct militant group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
The directed apology came on the heels of the High Court in Kuala Lumpur this morning finding Charles (above) having defamed the plaintiff in the latter's defamation suit against the former.
During a public lecture, the defendant in late November 2019 made a statement linking the plaintiff to the then mass arrests of 12 individuals over Malaysian authorities’ investigation into alleged LTTE links.
However, the civil court found that Charles had not defamed Zakir in relation to the former's other press statement (dated Aug 13, 2019) regarding the latter's Kelantan ceramah in August 2019, which was titled “The Misconception of Islam Among Non-Muslims”.
In his brief ruling, judge Akhtar Tahir ruled that the defence of justification protected the defendant's statement over the Kota Bharu speech as the plaintiff's ceramah could disrupt inter-ethnic harmony in Malaysia.
The judge said Charles was concerned over Zakir’s talk having the potential to cause racial riots as well as stir bitterness amongst Malaysians via a religious platform.
“In the view of this court, the topic itself is inappropriate in the Malaysian context as there is nothing to suggest that there is a widespread misconception of Islam by non-Muslims in Malaysia. The court feels that this is an unnecessary topic to be debated in Malaysia.
“Even if the misconception of Islam is a cause of concern in Malaysia, any talk on this topic should be directed towards the non-Muslims. In the talk in Kelantan, the majority of the listeners were Muslims.
“The court agrees with the defendant that the talk could stir religious sentiments and cause tensions amongst the various religious faiths in Malaysia,” Akhtar said.
Threat to multi-racial Malaysia
The judge noted that Zakir’s remark that questioned the loyalty of Indian Malaysians towards the government had transgressed the speech’s topic and had no bearing on the said topic.
Akhtar said the preacher’s remark in the speech that Chinese Malaysians should be asked to leave the country showed the plaintiff had interposed his own personal grievance of being asked to leave the country by making this unnecessary remark.
The judge said the court agreed with Charles that Zakir’s remark can cause a threat to multi-racial Malaysia, and had even attracted rebuke from the then-prime minister and other politicians.
However, Akhtar ruled that the defendant’s LTTE statement, which was carried by the online news portal Free Malaysia Today under the title “Criticism of Zakir Naik may have led to LTTE arrest, says MP”, was defamatory as the DAP member did not check his facts before making the remark.
“The court finds that although the remarks are an expression of an opinion of the defendant, they are speculative in nature and have not been verified in any manner nor any evidence led in the court by the defendant to prove their authenticity,” the judge said.
Akhtar however said Zakir is only entitled to an apology from Charles and not damages as the LTTE remark did not tarnish the image and reputation of the plaintiff.
“The (LTTE) remarks have in fact enhanced the reputation of the plaintiff as being someone who is influential in Malaysia,” the judge said.
Akhtar then called Zakir and Charles, who were present during proceedings, to come forward and asked the defendant to make a public apology on the LTTE statement.
When Charles looked towards his legal team, the judge reiterated the order for the defendant to apologise to the plaintiff.
“I apologise over the second statement,” Charles said per the court’s order.
When Akhtar asked whether Zakir accepted the apology, the plaintiff replied “Yes”.
The judge also ruled that each party is to bear their own legal costs.
Counsel Akberdin Abdul Kader represented Zakir, while lawyer SN Fam appeared for Charles.
