Zakir controversy: Ramasamy’s common sense indicator is reading ’empty’

For Ramasamy to lodge a police report against a law firm representing Zakir just because the firm sent him a legal letter makes no sense whatsoever, both legally and logically. Source (pic): TTF

Penang Deputy Chief Minister II Ramasamy threatened PAS information chief Kamaruzaman Mohamad with a defamation suit today after the latter accused him of being a proxy to foreign terrorists.

Yesterday, TTF noted how Ramasamy had abused the democratic process and his status as an elected representative by suggesting that the legal firm representing Zakir Naik had acted unprofessionally.

Ramasamy threatened to lodge a report against the law firm after having been served two letters of demand by Zakir via the firm which is based in Shah Alam.

On Sunday, the Indian preacher, branded a “fugitive televangelist” by DAP leaning media, served a notice demanding that Ramasamy apologise within 48 hours for defaming him during an interview with India Today.


PETALING JAYA: Penang Deputy Chief Minister II Ramasamy threatened PAS information chief Kamaruzaman Mohamad with a defamation suit today after the latter accused him of being a proxy to foreign terrorists.

According to the Malay Mail Online, Ramasamy said he will instruct his lawyer to prepare a notice of demand against Kamaruzaman.

“I have no choice but to file a defamation suit against him for making such baseless allegations against me,” he told the press here.


The MMO report read:

Yesterday, Kamaruzaman accused Ramasamy of being a proxy to foreign powers including terror groups.

He alleged that Ramasamy has links to militant group Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) in Sri Lanka, pointing to a photo of Ramasamy with Bagan Dalam assemblyman Satees Muniandy allegedly “worshiping the Kalashnikov emblem or AK-47 rifle” which he claimed was a ritual of the LTTE.

He also alleged that Ramasamy has close ties with Marumalarchi Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (MDMK) secretary-general, Gopalasamy Vaiko.

Yesterday, TTF noted how Ramasamy had abused the democratic process and his status as an elected representative by suggesting that the legal firm representing Zakir Naik had acted unprofessionally.

The post read:

For Ramasamy to lodge a police report against a law firm representing Zakir just because the firm sent him a legal letter makes no sense whatsoever, both legally and logically.

Someone needs to explain to Ramasamy that a legal letter is generally issued by an advocate for the purpose of making a demand or soliciting an agreement on behalf of his (or her) client.

To accuse an advocate of harbouring a different kind of intent or acting in a way that runs contrary to law or legal ethics is unprofessional, prejudiced, slanderous and tarnishes the reputation of the said advocate.

It could also be construed as a wilful attempt on Ramasamy’s part to shift conversations away from the actions Zakir has initiated against him by using the firm as scapegoat.

That itself is an abuse of the democratic process as Ramasamy is using his status as a public figure to confuse the people who brought him into power through the process.

It is therefore wise for the legal firm representing Zakir to send Ramasamy yet another letter, this time, by the firm itself, demanding that the latter apologise for publicly defaming the firm.

Ramasamy threatened to lodge a report against the law firm after having been served two letters of demand by Zakir via the firm which is based in Shah Alam.

On Sunday, the Indian preacher, branded a “fugitive televangelist” by DAP leaning media, served a notice demanding that Ramasamy apologise within 48 hours for defaming him during an interview with India Today.

Zakir claimed Ramasamy had uttered words that painted him out to be an unprincipled and unethical individual who employed Islamic teachings for personal gains or purposes.

In response, Ramasamy lodged a police report against Zakir and claimed he would lodging a report against the law firm which he accused of unprofessional conduct.

TTF pointed out that everyone in Malaysia reserved the right to legal representation no matter what the cause or circumstances were and that the purpose of such representation is to ensure that one is assisted in court by an advocate who is well versed with court proceedings, legal terminology and processes that can be extremely confusing.

THE THIRD FORCE

 

Loading...

COMMENTS

Comments

Comments



Loading...