During the hearing of the Bersatu president’s defamation suit against Umno’s Puad Zarkashi, Muhyiddin said he had always intended to be quarantined in accordance with the health director-general’s (DG) directions.
“I did not refuse to quarantine (myself). I was served with a home surveillance order (HSO) and fitted with a surveillance wristband.
“I observed home quarantine from Feb 5, 2021 until Feb 11, 2021. As such, I did not cause any scene or commotion at the Subang airport upon my return from Jakarta because of my alleged refusal to be quarantined,” he said in his witness statement.
Two years ago, Muhyiddin filed a defamation suit against the Umno Supreme Council member over Puad’s claim that the former prime minister had refused to undergo a mandatory Covid-19 quarantine.
Muhyiddin said he even rejected a health ministry officer’s suggestion that he did not have to be quarantined or be fitted with a surveillance bracelet.
“I have always taken the position that I should comply with the health DG’s direction like anyone else is expected to do.”
He said an exemption order for ministers was only to take effect from Feb 9 to Aug 1, and did not apply to him as he had returned from Jakarta on Feb 5.
He said the then health minister issued the exemption order because of the Cabinet’s decision, in good faith, to facilitate ministers’ official travel overseas to address the country’s investment woes.
On Feb 2, 2021, then health minister Dr Adham Baba gave an exemption order allowing ministers returning from abroad to only be quarantined for three days.
It was gazetted on Feb 8 and came into force the following day.
Muhyiddin maintained that the exemption order was not issued because of his refusal to be quarantined after coming back from Jakarta.
Cross-examined by Puad’s lawyer G Rajasingam, Muhyiddin, who admitted that this was the first time he was giving evidence in court, said he was not informed by Adham of the decision made on Feb 2.
Rajasingam: I suggest that since the decision was made by the Cabinet, you and other ministers must have known about the exemption order.
Muhyiddin: I disagree. The decision was not made by the Cabinet.
Rajasingam: I suggest that your oral evidence contradicts your witness statement.
Muhyiddin: I disagree.
Rajasingam: I suggest that the delegation to Jakarta was already aware of the order (special exemption) before they left the Indonesian capital.
Muhyiddin: I disagree.
The Pagoh MP filed the suit against Puad over a Facebook post titled “Kuarantin Pun Ada Dua Darjat”.
Muhyiddin contends that Puad’s posting implied that the former prime minister had refused to undergo a 10-day quarantine upon his return from his official visit to Indonesia.
He said the post – which was deleted by order of the court – contained statements that were plainly untrue, unsubstantiated and mischievous, and were defamatory of him.
According to a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office at the time, Muhyiddin was required to undergo home quarantine and wear a Covid-19 quarantine wristband.
Muhyiddin is seeking general, exemplary and aggravated damages from Puad.
Puad, who is also represented by lawyers Shahrul Fazli Kamarulzaman, Justin Tong and Ally Ong, is relying on the defence of justification, fair comment, qualified privilege and freedom of speech under Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.
The defendant has also taken the position that he was not making a statement but merely questioning Muhyiddin’s administration as public safety regarding the Covid pandemic was a cause of concern then.
Lawyers Rosli Dahlan, Bahri Yeow, Hayden Tan and Ling Siew Hui are representing Muhyiddin.
The hearing before Justice Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz will resume on Thursday.