here was nothing defamatory about the statements made by former deputy minister Datuk Seri Razali Ibrahim on Synergy Promenade Sdn Bhd’s (SPSB) involvement in the Jalan Semarak alleged dubious land deal, the High Court ruled. NSTP File pic / ADI SAFRI
here was nothing defamatory about the statements made by former deputy minister Datuk Seri Razali Ibrahim on Synergy Promenade Sdn Bhd’s (SPSB) involvement in the Jalan Semarak alleged dubious land deal, the High Court ruled. NSTP File pic / ADI SAFRI

KUALA LUMPUR: There was nothing defamatory about the statements made by former deputy minister Datuk Seri Razali Ibrahim on Synergy Promenade Sdn Bhd’s (SPSB) involvement in the Jalan Semarak alleged dubious land deal, the High Court ruled.

The decision was made by judge Datuk Nik Hasmat Nik Mohamad when she struck out the property developer’s suit against Razali in chambers today.

Counsel from Messrs Gideon Tan Razali Zaini, who represented Razali, said the court had allowed her client’s striking out application on grounds that the words in the statements were not defamatory.

“The plaintiff’s (SPSB) claim was struck out and the court ordered RM3,000 in costs to be paid by the plaintiff,” said the counsel who did not want to be named.

She said counsel Chetan Jethwani, who acted for SPSB, said he needed to get further instructions from his client (SPSB) on whether to appeal against the decision.

Chetan, when met outside the court, confirmed that the court has struck out his client’s suit on grounds that the statements by Razali were not defamatory.

Razali had filed a striking out application in October last year on grounds that the words in the statements were not defamatory and therefore the property developer had no cause of action to sue him.

On July 16 last year, SPSB filed a suit against the former Muar MP over his statements on the company’s involvement in the Kuala Lumpur Vertical City (KLVC) project at Jalan Semarak here.

The company claimed that Razali’s statements were false, baseless and had tarnished the company’s reputation.

According to SPSB, the company had earlier filed a notice requiring Razali to apologise but he had failed to do so.

The company had sought RM100 million in damages and an apology as well as an injunction to prevent Razali from repeating and/or publishing the defamatory statements.