File picture showing (from left) lawyers Adam Luqman and Yusfarizal Yussoff with their clients Mohd Ridhuan Giman and Siti Sarah Maulad Abdullah who are suing Jawi for wrongful khalwat raid and arrest. — Picture by Ida Lim

KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 4 — A Muslim couple today withdrew their high-profile lawsuit against the Federal Territories Islamic Religious Department (Jawi) over a raid and their arrest a year ago for khalwat or close proximity.

Mohd Ridhuan Giman, 34, unexpectedly told the Kuala Lumpur High Court today that he wished to discontinue the lawsuit.

“With permission,I wish to withdraw from this case,” he said, noting that he is facing three charges in the Shariah court which he has to focus on.

“There is a lot of costs I have to bear. Because of the cases I was sacked and I am working freelance and my income is also not fixed,” he said.

Justice Datuk Nordin Hassan repeatedly confirmed with Mohd Ridhuan of his intentions, and asked him what his wife intended to do with the lawsuit.

“Actually I was not able to contact her,” Mohd Ridhuan said, but confirmed that the wife was also “not interested” in continuing the lawsuit.

The 26-year-old wife, Siti Sarah Maulad Abdullah, was not present in court today.

Senior federal counsel Kamal Azira Hassan, who represented Jawi and the six others sued, asked that the court award legal costs of RM10,000.

Kamal Azira further asked for an apology from the couple for filing the lawsuit, saying: “Since the first and second plaintiffs want to withdraw the action against the defendants, but the damage has been done to the institution by the filing of the lawsuit.”

He pointed out that the lawsuit against Jawi received wide circulation in social media including over the Whatsapp platform and also received widespread media coverage.

Nordin noted that the case had yet to be heard on its merits and could “go either way”, where it could favour the couple or Jawi.

He then said: “I am striking out the case that was brought by the plaintiffs against the defendants because the plaintiff and the wife wants to withdraw voluntarily, it was confirmed by the plaintiff.”

The judge acknowledged the extensive work carried out and costs borne by those sued by the couple, saying: “However I find the decision to withdraw this case was due to financial problems and not merits as this case has yet to be heard by the court, therefore I impose cost of RM3,000.”

The judge did not order the duo to issue an apology.

Today was initially fixed to be the start of a three-day hearing for the lawsuit.

Prior to the start of the hearing, lawyer Adam Luqman Amdan told the court that the legal team wanted to discharge themselves from representing the couple.

Adam Luqman explained to the judge that he was able to contact his clients, but said lawyers faced “difficulties” in obtaining certain documents from them, such as the couple's employment and medical reports.

“In terms of testimony, I can say that the first and second plaintiffs are not on good terms anymore, so I have difficulty to ask them to give testimony,” he said, noting that it was hard to get the married couple together to have them verify details of the case.

“I was not able to get a single version of facts that is absolute for me to present for hearing,” he said.

He also told the judge that he had informed Siti Sarah of today's hearing, but that the latter was unable to come.

Adam Luqman's application for him and his colleague Yusfarizal Yussoff to be discharged was heard before the husband stepped forward to withdraw his case.

When met later, the lawyer told reporters that neither the husband nor the wife had informed him of their intentions to drop the case.

Last February 17, the couple and the husband’s mother had filed a lawsuit against two Jawi enforcement officers, the Jawi chief religious enforcement officer, Jawi director, Jawi, the Prime Minister’s Department and the government of Malaysia over the raid on January 8 of a budget hotel room.

They sued for wrongful arrest, wrongful confinement, trespass to person, violation of privacy, tort of abuse of office and violation of the duo’s rights to personal liberty and freedom of movement under the Federal Constitution’s Articles 5 and 9.

The couple had sought for general damages for the injury to their reputation, aggravated damages, exemplary damages, a court order instructing Jawi to drop the investigation, as well as an unconditional apology in the form of a letter to the them and in at least two Malay-language newspapers.

It is understood that the mother had previously withdrawn from the lawsuit.

In the defence statement filed last year by Jawi and the others sued, they denied the couple's allegations, asserting that the January 8 raid and arrest was valid and in accordance with the law.

They said the raid was based on a public tip-off about a suspected khalwat case, asserting that the couple had during the raid failed to present evidence that they were married and refused to cooperate.

Among other things, they said Jawi enforcers did not carry out “assault and battery” on the couple during the raid, and said they could produce photos and video recordings — which they said were taken for investigation purposes — to show the situation then.

They denied all claims of wrongful arrest, wrongful confinement, trespass to person, violation of privacy, tort of abuse of office, violation of constitutional rights.