MIC's 9 vs one: NGO leader sued over Mitra fund, 'thug-like' claims in TikTok videos

MIC president SA Vigneswaran, deputy president M Saravanan, and seven other party leaders have filed a defamation suit against Persatuan Jalinan Perpaduan Negara Malaysia president Syed Imran Syed Abdul Aziz over three TikTok videos related to the Malaysian Indian Transformation Unit (Mitra) funds

The other plaintiffs in the suit, filed at the Shah Alam High Court on June 29 through Messrs Kamil Hashim, Raj and Lim, are MIC vice-presidents M Asojan, T Murugiah, R Nelson, S Vell Paari, and M Ramasamy, as well as the secretary-general S Ananthan, and the treasurer-general N Sivakumar.

The plaintiffs are seeking general, aggravated, and exemplary damages, along with compensation, an injunction against further publication of the alleged defamatory content, an unequivocal and unconditional apology, a retraction, and five percent interest on the judgment sum.

The plaintiffs claimed that in the TikTok videos uploaded on May 28 and June 21, Syed Imran defamed them by questioning the whereabouts of the Mitra funds and alleging that the party was responsible for the allocation.

The plaintiffs also included another video, a snippet of TheGoodCastShow podcast uploaded to TikTok on June 20, in which Syed Imran said the political leaders are entrusted with safeguarding the Indian community’s rights.

‘Videos referred to plaintiffs’

The plaintiffs alleged that the videos referred to them even though their names were not mentioned in the clips.

“The defendant repeatedly mentioned ‘the leaders of MIC’ throughout these videos, (as) at all material times, the plaintiffs were the main national leadership of MIC - that is the president, deputy president, vice-presidents, and secretary-general.

“The plaintiffs are and remain among the most prominent MIC office-bearers known to the party members, the Malaysian Indian community, and the general public.

“The defendant also tagged Saravanan in the first two videos - which reinforces and confirms to the viewer that the allegations are directed at the leadership and office-bearers of MIC, including the plaintiffs,” they said.

The plaintiffs claimed Syed Imran’s videos suggested they misappropriated billions of ringgit allocated to the Indian community or dishonestly enriched themselves through Mitra funds.

“(The videos allege MIC) were responsible for the continuing poverty and deprivation experienced by the Indian community because funds allocated for their benefit failed to reach them.

“They (the videos) allege MIC is associated with acts of corruption, financial misconduct, and the misuse of public funds, or that the plaintiffs behaved like or resembled ‘thugs’, causing members of the public to fear questioning them.

“The words mentioned in the videos disparaged the plaintiffs in their official capacities and lowered them in the eyes of the public, while exposing them to public hatred, contempt, and ridicule,” they added.

The plaintiffs said neither the party nor any of them possessed the legal authority to control or administer Mitra funds, as this rested exclusively with the Human Resources Ministry.

Propaganda campaign

They claimed that Syed Imran’s videos were part of a deliberate and continuous campaign directed at MIC and its leadership.

“The tone and manner of the (statements in these videos) are accusatory and inflammatory, as they are framed as rhetorical questions and statements intended to implicitly convey the plaintiffs’ culpability rather than to inform or inquire in good faith.

“These allegations were not directed at MIC as an abstract political entity but specifically at those who lead, manage, represent, and bear responsibility for the party, namely the plaintiffs.

“Consequently, a reasonable ordinary viewer would naturally and reasonably understand these allegations as being directed at the plaintiffs personally,” their statement added.

The plaintiffs said they sent a letter of demand to Syed Imran on June 3, but the latter refused to apologise or retract his statements.

“Each plaintiff has suffered severe injury to their character, credit, and reputation, both personal and professional,” they added.

SNAPSHOT | 'PM can dismiss BN ministers if unhappy with them'; Tamim claims trial to damaging soolam

RM8m transferred from FashionValet to another company, witness tells court

Court frees Bung's widow from charges of abetting RM2.8m bribery

Company gave Bersatu RM1m for unknown reasons, witness tells court in Muhyiddin's graft trial

Mentega Terbang: Court of Appeal upholds home minister's power to ban films

Four EkoCheras house buyers lose bid for extra late damages