KUALA LUMPUR: Activist Lalitha Kunaratnam, who implicated Tan Sri Azam Baki in a share-trading controversy, lacks the credibility to be known as an investigative journalist, the graft-buster chief has claimed.

       The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner, who is suing Lalitha over her articles on the purchase of millions of shares in two public-listed companies in 2015, said “she is not the investigative journalist that she claims to be”.

       In his reply to her statement of defence, Azam said it was “illogical” for the defendant to deny her address of service for court documents as the C4: Center to Combat Corruption & Cronyism (C4) office in Petaling Jaya, when she herself had pleaded in her court document that she has an employment contract with the centre.

       Azam said C4 itself had issued a public statement to say that Lalitha has not been their employee since December 2020.

       “Although the media statement was circulated on Jan 14, which was before (Lalitha’s) statement of defence was filed on Feb 3, the defendant still claims to being a C4 staffer.

       “Clearly, the statement of defence was untrue and contradicted C4’s media statement and an attempt to mislead the honourable court.

       “The defendant’s statement of defence has shown her lacking credibility and she is not the investigative journalist that she claims to be,” said Azam in the document.

       The reply was filed at the Kuala Lumpur High Court yesterday.

       The case was brought up for case management yesterday and lawyer Mohamed Ibrahim Mohamad, who represented Lalitha, said the next case management has been fixed for March 8.

       “Parties have until March 8 to file in any interlocutory applications respectively,” he said when contacted.

       On Jan 12, Azam filed the lawsuit against Lalitha over her two articles titled “Business Ties Among MACC Leadership: How Deep Does It Go? (Part 1)” and “Business Ties Among MACC Leadership: How Deep Does It Go? (Part 2)” on news portal Independent News Service on Oct 26. The two articles were republished on Dec 15.

       The articles, Azam claimed, were drafted, published and republished with malice and mala fide (bad intention) to give impact and bad perception to the readers for them to conclude that Azam was a corrupt civil servant who abused his position as a top-ranking MACC officer for his own interests as well as his brother’s.

       Azam claimed that the defendant had never obtained confirmation from him regarding the articles.

       He also claimed that the defendant had tarnished his good name, reputation and standing due to the publication and re-publication of the articles, tweets and the lawyer’s media statement.

       He wants an injunction against the defendant or her agents from republishing the allegations against him and for her to take down the impugned defamatory statements, articles and tweets that damaged his public image.

       Azam is also seeking an apology from the defendant to be published in newspapers and social media platforms of his choice.

       He is seeking RM10mil in general damages, aggravated damages, interests, costs and other reliefs deemed fit by the court.

       On Feb 3, Lalitha filed her statement of defence, claiming that the information shared in her articles and tweets concerning Azam were extracted from confirmed sources.

       “The defendant has reported the articles based on what she had extracted from confirmed sources and summed the information accurately, fairly and in a neutral way.

       “The defendant pleads that it is essential in the public interest for the public (of which its readers are comprised) to receive frank and uninhibited communication of particular information,” said the statement.