Hannah Yeoh raises objection to witness statements in defamation case against UUM lecturer

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 3 — Hannah Yeoh today raised a preliminary objection to the statements of four witnesses presented in support of Universiti Utara Malaysia (UUM) lecturer Kamarul Zaman Yusoff’s defence in the lawsuit she filed against him.

The Youth and Sports Minister’s lawyer, Sangeet Kaur Deo, informed High Court Judge Datuk Aliza Sulaiman that the witness statements addressed matters beyond the scope of the defamation lawsuit.

Today marks the sixth day of the trial in the defamation lawsuit filed by Hannah against Kamarul Zaman regarding two Facebook posts made by him in May 2017. The trial began on November 25 last year.

The four witnesses in question are former Universiti Teknologi MARA vice-chancellor Tan Sri Dr. Ibrahim Abu Shah, Gabungan Nasionalis chairman Aminudin Yahaya, former senior executive of the Islamic Strategic Studies Institute Malaysia Harizal Hassan, and freelance writer Helen Ang.

Meanwhile, Kamarul Zaman’s lawyer Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz expressed surprise at the objection raised by the plaintiff today.

He submitted that the Malaysian Bar’s ethical guidelines require the opposing party to be notified in advance of any preliminary objections to be raised.

“In light of this, we request the court to grant us time to prepare a rebuttal to the objection,” he said.

Judge Aliza then decided to hear Sangeet’s oral submissions today, while Khairul Azam was granted until tomorrow to prepare his rebuttal.

In the lawsuit filed in 2022, Hannah claimed that Kamarul Zaman had made two Facebook posts between May 10 and May 17, 2017, in which he accused the plaintiff of having an agenda to spread Christianity through her politics.

The lecturer also purportedly referenced Hannah’s biography, “Becoming Hannah: A Personal Journey”, to suggest that she was advancing a Christian agenda and had intentions to transform Malaysia into a Christian nation.

In his defence, Kamarul Zaman asserted that the posts were not defamatory and that he had a duty to inform the public about the contents of the book, out of concern that they might be influenced by its Christian narrative. — Bernama