SN Nair said the PAC chairman is “clothed in immunity” in carrying out his public duty.
“Anyone can file a suit against another for lowering one’s reputation but one must ask about the prospects of a successful litigation,” said the lawyer, who was once a Kuala Lumpur City Hall (DBKL) advisory board member.
Nair said this in response to a statement yesterday by Yayasan Wilayah Persekutuan (YWP) that it wants to take legal action against PAC chairman Wong Kah Woh in his personal capacity for allegedly damaging its reputation.
In the statement issued by the CEO of YWP, the foundation said the Ipoh Timur MP had abused his position as PAC chairman by making false allegations against them.
“Based on the provisions of the constitution and the law, YWP has the right to defend itself against Wong’s three statements which were seen to undermine the credibility of YWP,” the statement said.
YWP refuted Wong’s statement that the federal territories minister and the Kuala Lumpur mayor were automatically appointed the foundation’s chairman and a member of the trustees board, respectively.
It also dismissed the PAC chairman’s statement that the foundation was involved in the sale of 97 plots of DBKL land, including those in Taman Rimba Kiara.
YWP also disagreed with Wong’s statement that the foundation is a company registered under the Companies Act and is not monitored by the authorities.
It had threatened to sue Wong on Thursday over his statement after the completion of PAC’s probe into 97 land deals by DBKL since 2011.
The PAC then warned the relevant parties against making any threats to its members who were only carrying out their duties, stating these were uncalled for and were an attempt to challenge and desecrate the institution of Parliament.
Nair said immunity was given to the PAC chairman and members for public policy reasons.
“One cannot use the courts as a weapon to silence them from carrying out their duties and function in their official capacity,” he said.
Lawyer T Gunaseelan said Wong had all the defence available to thwart any defamation action against him.
He said the chairman could rely on the defence of justification, fair comment and qualified privilege.
“The defence of fair comment will only be unavailable if YWP can show that Wong made the statement with bad intentions, which is the unlikely case here,” he said.