UMNO’s assemblyman for Bugaya Datuk Ramlee Marahaban has filed a RM10 million suit against Parti Warisan leaders Junz Wong and Dato’ Mohd Azis Jamman for defamation.
Ramlee, who is also the state assistant finance minister, named Junz Wong and Azis Jamman as the first and second defendant, respectively.
He is seeking damages for libel in the sum of RM10 million as well as aggravated and exemplary damages for libel, damages for trespass to the person and to property of the Plaintiff; Cost, Statutory Interest and any other relief deemed fit by the court.
Ramlee also sought an injunction restraining the defendants and each of them whether by themselves or by their servants or agents or otherwise howsoever from further speaking and publishing and causing to be published the defamatory words or any similar words defamatory of him, whether orally or in print media or on the internet.
He is also seeking an injunction against the defendants whether by themselves or by their servants or agents from assaulting him or making unlawful intrusions into and over his property by the use of drones or other unmanned flying vehicles for unlawful purposes.
The suit which was filed via e-filing at the High Court registry through counsel Marcel Jude, has been fixed for mention Jan 3, next year.
In his statement of claim, Ramlee claimed that on Nov. 15, this year, a report entitled ‘Who Own These House, Luxury Cars and Private Jet?’ – Warisan was published by the defendants through the Borneo Post.
Similar postings of the false allegation were posted on Facebook, WhatsApp and other social media whether by themselves or servants or agents, said Ramlee.
Furthermore, in consequence of the publication of the news report in the print and social media, is a defamation of the plaintiff committed by the defendants, claimed Ramlee.
He said the defendants whether by themselves or servants or agents made unlawful use of a drone or drones and drone technology to unlawfully intrude into his private property without his consent, knowledge or authorisation.
Furthermore, the use of such drone or drone technology was undertaken without proper licensing by the Minister of Communication and Multimedia.
Ramlee claimed that the actions of the defendants whether by themselves or servants or agents constitute an unlawful entry into his premises.
As a result, the defendants have committed the torts of trespass to the person of the plaintiff and trespass to the property of the plaintiff.
The defendants violated the privacy of the plaintiff as a trespasser who is any person who enters or goes upon the real estate of another without any right, lawful authority or invitation, either expressed or implied, said Ramlee, adding that as a result, he suffered loss and damage.
Ramlee claimed that by the said words, the defendants meant and was understood to mean that he is corrupted and or is practising corruption; abuses his position in the Ministry of Finance to accumulate wealth, has been enjoying luxurious life at the expense of his constituency, has abused his position and trust as a member of the State Government of Sabah, has no respect for the rule of law and does not comply with the laws of Malaysia and financial accountability and responsibility, is unfit to be a member of the State Legislative Assembly of Sabah, is unfit to be a member of the Cabinet and a hold his ministerial post, is purely hedonistic in his values has no concern for the needs of the poor or needy, is living or is able to live beyond his means, all the cars in the house belong to him or are owned by him.
Ramlee claimed that he has in consequence been gravely injured in his character, credit and reputation and has been brought into public scandal, odium and contempt and hurt in his feelings.
He also claimed that the defendants had published these words without even seeking his comments or views.
The defendants in publishing these words were reckless and did not seek confirmation from him.
The defendants libel of the plaintiff are extremely damaging to him.
Ramlee further claimed that the defamatory words spoken by the defendants are thus false, baseless and maliciously published and he has been gravely injured in his character, credit, personal and political reputation and in the way of his office.
