Yong and SAPP filed statement of defence for Harris suit
KOTA KINABALU: Former Chief Minister Datuk Harris Salleh's Statement of
Claim in his legal suit against Sabah Progressive Party (SAPP) President
Datuk Yong Teck Lee was based on "figments of the plaintiff's imagination
and his ultra sensitivity".
Yong in his Statement of Defence also denied that the words in his Press
statement calling for the Double Six Tragedy investigation file to be
reopened were malicious and had defamatory meaning to Harris.
Harris had named Yong as the first defendant and SAPP as the second
defendant in the legal suit filed last month here.
In the Statement of Defence filed by Messr Shim Pang & Co at the High
Court on Wednesday, Yong said the words and passages of the statement were
only responding to Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah's revelation of the incident
for the first time after almost 34 years that it was Harris who asked him
and a few others to leave the aircraft shortly before it took off and
crashed.
Yong also denied any malice at all towards Harris and it was proven by the
fact that Harris had previously been invited to speak at convention
organised by the SAPP that was published in the Borneo Post, Overseas
Chinese Daily News and Asia Times on Aug 31, 2008.
This is not only a gesture of goodwill but also due to the plaintiff's
vast experience and knowledge in politics and the history of Sabah, said
Yong who is also a former chief minister.
Yong said there were also other quarters who had commented and published
in the media or in the internet in response to Tengku Razaleigh's
revelation but Harris failed, ignored and/or refused to commence legal
action against the relevant parties but chose only to commence legal
action against him and SAPP.
This, Yong's defence said was tantamount to being biased, selective and
personal against the defendants.
The defendants also contended that the allegation by Harris that the press
statement made by Yong was meant as a political weapon against him "is the
figment of his imagination and his ultra sensitivity".
Yong's Statement of Defence said that since Harris in his Statement of
Claim had described Tengku Razaleigh's comments were innocent then the
comments by the defendants on the same comments were equally innocent.
Yong aver that the purported VCD produced by the Australian Broadcasting
Corporation and the accounts by the families of the late Tun Fuad
Stephens, which may or may not be conclusive and/or sufficient evidence in
determining the real causes of the plane crash may assist the tribunal in
the determination of the real causes of the crash, which justifies a call
for the investigation or re-investigation of the incident.
Furthermore, since Harris had claimed that the crash was due to problems
and/or defects of the aircraft, the defence brought attention to a book
entitled, "Harris Salleh of Sabah", which highlighted that it was common
knowledge that there were no faults found with the aircraft and most
experts believed the crash was caused by pilot error.
It was also highlighted (in the book) that the results of the
investigation of the crash was never released therefore the defendants
contended that it would further justify investigation of the said incident
and a thorough investigation was necessary to establish the real causes of
the plane crash.
Further, the Statement of Defence claimed that the press statement made by
Yong was fair comment and made in good faith in the matter of public
interest.
Yong's statement of defence also said that the plane crash that took the
lives of Tun Fuad Stephens (then Chief Minister) and several other
prominent Cabinet members and political leaders was a very significant
event in Sabah.
"The public would like to know, inter alia, why the Plaintiff did not
board the plane; whether it was the Plaintiff who at the very last moment
requested the said Tengku Razaleigh and two others to leave the plane and
if so, why?"
As a responsible politician, Yong was under a legal, moral and social
obligation to publish the Press statement to the public and the public had
a like interest to know them.
Furthermore, the statement of defence stated that Yong and SAPP were
merely exercising their constitutional right of freedom of expression when
calling for an investigation of the plane crash in response to the
revelation of the personal account of the passenger who was asked by the
Plaintiff to leave the aircraft after having boarded, which was not
defamatory and perfectly justifiable in all the circumstances of the case.
|
