The minister of rural and regional development said he did not seek clarification from Izzah before issuing a statement to the media on Nov 22, 2015.
“I issued the statement based on the news carried in the mainstream media,” he said.
He also said he did not refer to the explanation by Izzah published in the social media between Nov 19 and 21 the same year before he made the statement.
“The plaintiff should have called the media to make a clarification, not just issue a statement through the social media,” he said when questioned by Izzah’s lawyer, Sivarasa Rasiah.
Ismail is being sued for defamation together with former inspector-general of police Khalid Abu Bakar. The case is being heard before Judicial Commissioner Faizah Jamaludin.
The meeting between Izzah and Jacel caused a stir after the Filipina posted four pictures of them together on Facebook on Nov 9, 2015.
Jacel’s father, Jamalul Kiram III, who styled himself as the successor to the Sulu sultanate, ordered about 200 armed men to intrude into Lahad Datu on Sabah’s east coast to lay claim to the state.
The incident led to the death of 56 militants and 10 members of Malaysia’s security forces. The rest of the intruders were either captured or escaped back to the Philippines.
Izzah accused Khalid and Ismail of defaming her in statements they made at a media conference in Bukit Aman police headquarters and at Bera, Pahang, on Nov 22, 2015.
Ismail argued that Izzah, as an MP, should have realised that the intrusion by Kiram’s militants had a serious effect on the country, in addition to the loss of lives of security forces members.
During a hearing on Oct 19, Khalid said Jacel could be considered an enemy of the country because she acted as a spokesperson for the militants of Jamalul Kiram III.
According to Khalid, Jacel was actively issuing statements through social media and newspapers to smear Malaysia and its security forces.
“I view the action by the plaintiff to meet with Jacel as treasonous because the plaintiff met an individual linked to a group that waged war against Malaysia,” Khalid said in his testimony.
“On this ground, the plaintiff could be charged under the Penal Code and the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2015.”
Speaking to reporters later, Sivarasa said the testimonies of Ismail and Khalid showed that they had made hasty statements against Izzah.
“The issue is that they did not seek clarification from the plaintiff. Nurul Izzah clarified twice and they should have been aware of it before they made their comments,” he said.
Izzah had clarified that she did not know Jacel who was one of 15 guests invited to the programme organised by the Council for Philippine Affairs, Asian Institute for Democracy, Manila mayor’s office and the Philippine vice president’s office.
“All of those present at the programme took pictures with me in support of the UN working group on detention without trial which called for the immediate release of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim,” said Izzah on Nov 21, 2015.