KUALA LUMPUR – Former Klang MP Charles Santiago alleged that controversial preacher Zakir Naik did not understand race relation dynamics in Malaysia when the latter made an “incorrect” assessment of Indians in the country, the high court here heard today.
Testifying in a defamation suit filed against him by Zakir, Santiago said the latter’s allegedly incendiary comments on the difference between minority Hindus in Malaysia and minority Muslims in India, during a speech in Kelantan, undermined the challenges faced by both communities.
“The plaintiff may not understand race relation dynamics in Malaysia. Comparing the dynamics surrounding minority Hindus in Malaysia and minority Muslims in India is incorrect.
“It’s like comparing apples and oranges and undermines the reality faced by different communities.
“The political and historical development of both of these communities is different. Most Indians who came to Malaysia (were) migrant labourers working in plantations.
“The talk was given to a Muslim crowd who (were) told that their Hindu neighbours in Malaysia are traitors, in the sense that they are loyal to the prime minister of India more than the prime minister of Malaysia.
“This is inflammatory in the context of a multiracial society (like) Malaysia where race relations are delicate, fragile, and need to be protected. In his speech here, the plaintiff questioned the loyalty of Malaysian Hindus,” said Santiago in response to supplementary questions posed by his lawyer.
Santiago also said that by questioning the loyalty of Hindus in Malaysia, Zakir had interfered with local politics.
“As a preacher, the plaintiff should be inclusive and not divisive, and his speech borders on hate speech – which is a source of concern locally and globally,” he said.
Zakir filed a suit against Santiago in November 2019, alleging that statements made by the former DAP lawmaker in a Facebook post in August of the same year were defamatory.
In the social media post, Santiago mentioned that Zakir’s statements during a speech in Kelantan in August 2019 were inflammatory, dangerous, and had the potential of stirring racial riots.
In the same posting, Santiago also said Zakir was attempting to “curry favour” with then Malaysian prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who he claimed refused to extradite the preacher despite requests by India, for fear of offending the local Muslim community.
Santiago also denied that he had called Zakir a dishonest person who would abuse Islam for his own selfish purposes. The former Klang MP further denied saying the preacher had unfairly and dishonestly accused Malaysian Hindus of being disloyal to their own country.
“The statement when read as a whole does not bear the meanings as alleged by the plaintiff. It must be viewed objectively and in the totality of the plaintiff’s background, including the circumstances in which he obtained his permanent residence – it is not defamatory of the plaintiff.
“The plaintiff’s statements are not based on reality and there is no study or research to show that Malaysian Hindus support Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.
“The plaintiff’s statement was given to a predominantly Malay-Muslim community in
Kelantan (and) has the trappings of racial provocation.
“Further, the plaintiff’s speech was made at the said event, which was organised by the Kelantan state government who did not refute or clarify (the) plaintiff’s statement despite the public outcry,” he said.
The hearing today was carried out before judge Datuk Akhtar Tahir.
The court also heard questions posed during cross-examination by Zakir’s lawyer, Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader.
Akhtar has set May 24 for the verdict. – The Vibes, April 3, 2023
