"[Tuan Ibrahim] as the then minister should take up the challenge to provide an explanation. The defendant’s [Rafizi] intentions were not malicious. It is in line with his right to voice his opinion as a politician, citizen and a taxpayer which is a right protected by Article 10(1)(a) of the Constitution.” — Rafizi’s defence statement
KUALA LUMPUR (Jan 25): Economy Minister Rafizi Ramli said that statements made at the centre of a defamation suit against him by former Environment and Water Minister Datuk Seri Tuan Ibrahim Tuan Man were an "invitation" for the latter to answer the allegations raised over the approval of several projects, including on flood mitigation.
In his statement of defence filed late last month, Rafizi said that his words were neither defamatory in nature and nor were they accusations, but rather more of an invitation and suggestion or request for Tuan Ibrahim to give an explanation regarding — among others — a flood mitigation project worth RM2 billion where alleged negotiations were ongoing during the caretaker government's tenure.
"[Tuan Ibrahim] as the then minister should take up the challenge to provide an explanation. The defendant's [Rafizi] intentions were not malicious. It is in line with his right to voice his opinion as a politician, citizen and a taxpayer which is a right protected by Article 10(1)(a) of the Constitution," the statement read.
The abovementioned section of the Constitution deals with freedom of speech and expression.
The PKR deputy president added that his statements, among others, were to highlight issues of transparency of authorities in awarding contracts to the public.
Tuan Ibrahim filed the suit on Nov 17 last year over two media statements Rafizi made in Nov 2022 at PKR headquarters.
According to the statement of claim, Rafizi's statements implied that there were "negotiations, discussions and efforts" involving Tuan Ibrahim , as then caretaker minister to approve projects worth RM2 billion to Mangkubumi Sdn Bhd through direct negotiations for the Sungai Langat flood mitigation project.
The PAS man also claimed that Rafizi's statements had also implied that he had previously approved three other projects amounting to RM 2.3 billion to Mangkubumi.
Tuan Ibrahim added that after Parliament was dissolved on Oct 10, 2022, he was not involved in any such negotiations and had ordered his ministry to suspend all procurement processes relating to Off-Budget Flood Mitigation Project (2023-2030) and Langat River Flood Mitigation Plan.
He said that the three projects amounting to RM 2.3 billion were approved between 2013 and 2017, before he took over the ministerial position in March 2020.
Tuan Ibrahim claimed that Rafizi's statements were false to distort facts to give the impression that he had dishonestly acted beyond his duties as a caretaker minister.
In his reply to Rafizi's defence filed last week, Tuan Ibrahim said that Rafizi's statements were motivated in his capacity as a candidate for the 15th General Election.
He added that this was further strengthened by Rafizi’s purported admission that he did not intend to lodge a report against Tuan Ibrahim to the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) but would wait until his party won GE15 and formed the government.
Tuan Ibrahim contended that Rafizi's claim that he acted as a concerned citizen was "nonsense" when the facts showed that the statements were made to gain political mileage.
Among others, Tuan Ibrahim wants Rafizi to make a public apology in local Malay and English dailies, on his Facebook, Twitter and YouTube accounts, as well as on the PKR website.
He also wants Rafizi to retract or delete all related media statements on the same social media platforms within 48 hours from the date of judgement.
Apart from seeking general, exemplary and aggravated damages, Tuan Ibrahim has also applied for an injunction to restrain Rafizi from publishing any similar statements and videos.
Tuan Ibrahim is represented by the law firm Yusfarizal Aziz & Zaid while Rafizi is represented by the law firm Mohd Ashraf, Nik Zarith & Co.
The matter came up for case management on Wednesday, and will come up for case management again on March 31.