Hannah Yeoh Wins Defamation Suit, Kamarul Zaman Ordered To Pay RM400,000 In Damages

KUALA LUMPUR, May 30 (Bernama) -- The High Court has ruled in favour of Segambut Member of Parliament Hannah Yeoh and ordered Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) lecturer Dr Kamarul Zaman Yusoff to pay RM400,000 in damages for the defamatory remarks he made eight years ago.

The decision was delivered by Judge Datuk Aliza Sulaiman, who allowed Hannah’s claim after finding no merit in the defendant’s submission that she lacked locus standi to initiate the suit.

The defamation suit, filed in 2022, arose from two Facebook posts made by Kamarul Zaman between May 10 and May 17, 2017, in which he alleged that Hannah had a proselytising agenda and was using her political platform to advance Christianity.

He also cited her autobiography, Becoming Hannah: A Personal Journey, as evidence of her purported Christian agenda, further alleging that she sought to turn Malaysia into a Christian nation.

In his statement of defence, Kamarul Zaman denied that the posts were defamatory and asserted that his statements were justified.

Judge Aliza held that the court was satisfied the plaintiff, Hannah, had discharged the burden of proof on a balance of probabilities in establishing that the first and second posts were defamatory of her.

"He (defendant) suggests the plaintiff (Hannah) is a threat to Islam and used her position to 'Christianise' the country.

"In a multiracial and multireligious country where the issue of religion is, of course, very sensitive, this would surely expose the plaintiff to hatred, ridicule and contempt," she said.

The judge further noted that the defendant had pleaded the defences of justification, fair comment and qualified privilege, but found that none had been successfully established.

"Even if the defences of fair comment and qualified privilege were established, the plaintiff had pleaded particulars of malice in the reply to the defence, and in my view has proven on the balance of probabilities that the defendant was actuated by malice," said the judge.

Judge Aliza further held that if the defendant genuinely believed the plaintiff had committed an offence, lodging a police report would have been sufficient. Instead, the defendant chose to publish it on Facebook.

She noted that the publication was not in dispute, and it was evident from both the titles and content that the statements were directed specifically at the plaintiff.

The judge also rejected the defence’s contention that the first publication was aimed at DAP as a political party, rather than the plaintiff personally.

"Even the defendant’s own pleadings mentioned the plaintiff by name, and the title of the article made the target unmistakable. The defendant’s personal understanding of the book is not relevant, as what matters is how an ordinary reader would interpret the statements.

"The readers would reasonably believe that the plaintiff was spreading Christianity unlawfully and, by implication, committing a crime," she said.

Judge Aliza allowed the plaintiff’s claim upon finding that the plaintiff had established her case on a balance of probabilities and that the defendant had acted with malice.

"The court awards RM400,000 as general and aggravated damages to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff. This means, RM200,000 per publication and RM80,000 in costs," she said.

The judge, however, dismissed Hannah's application for Kamarul Zaman to issue a public apology, saying that such an apology could be seen as insincere. 

She also granted an injunction to restrain the defendant, his servants, or agents from republishing the impugned words or similar statements.

Hannah was present in court today, accompanied by her counsel, Sangeet Kaur Deo, while the defendant, Dr Kamarul Zaman Yusoff, was not in attendance.

When met by reporters, Hannah expressed her gratitude to her legal team for their tireless efforts in seeking justice on her behalf.

“After enduring years of defamation, justice has finally prevailed. These allegations were entirely false, and I have been praying since 2017 for this. I sincerely hope that moving forward, no one will resort to exploiting religious sentiments or spreading baseless accusations about me or my book.

“The court has acknowledged that the issue at hand involved religious sentiment.

“In a multiracial and multireligious country like ours, invoking such sentiments is akin to playing with fire. It is dangerous, especially when it involves slander. I believe slander is prohibited in Islam,” said the Youth and Sports Minister.

-- BERNAMA