![]() ![]() They were uttered without provocation and had nothing to do with the ongoing debate at that time. She said the court was of the view that there was no need for the plaintiff to express vulgar words against the Seputeh MP. Latifah said the case stemmed from the plaintiff’s (Tajuddin) behaviour in Parliament on November 21, 2016, where he had issued a sexist statement and used unparliamentary language in his speech against the Seputeh MP that caused dissatisfaction among opposition MPs, especially Khalid. “The court was also satisfied that the statements made by the first defendant at the first press conference were reasonable comments and without malice, which were based on facts that were in the knowledge of the first defendant himself,” she said. ![]() She said this was supported by the testimony of the witnesses of the MPs who testified in court during the trial.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |