Former premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad said today his remarks that former protege Anwar Ibrahim was a homosexual were "justified" and argued that he had a "moral and social duty" to say this.

He said this in his statement of defence against a defamation suit filed by Anwar who claimed that he was defamed by the remarks made at a public event organised by the Human Rights Commission (Suhakam) last year.

In the 37-page document filed today, Mahathir said that the gay remarks were justified based on a string of facts including the convictions of Anwar's ex-speechwriter Dr Munawar Anees and Indonesian-born adopted brother Sukma Darmawan Sasmitaat Madja for sodomy offences involving the former deputy premier.

Mahathir also said that he had a "moral and social duty" to make the remarks as he claimed that Anwar still has the ambition to be the country's prime minister.

These remarks were made to convey his views that it was "unimaginable and unthinkable to have a gay prime minister".

The document - which was filed with the Kuala Lumpur High Court this morning by his lawyer VK Lingam - also stated that Anwar's law suit against Mahathir was an abuse of the court process.

"It is a scandalous, frivolous and vexatious action," Lingam said in the statement.

Not fit to be in cabinet

In January this year, Anwar filed the law suit and demanded unspecified damages and an injunction to prevent Mahathir from repeating the allegations, in which the former premier claimed that Anwar was unfit to be part of his cabinet due to the alleged immoral activities.

Before filing the suit, Anwar sent Mahathir - who retired in 2003 after helming the country for 22 years - a demand letter seeking an apology and RM100 million damages over the "defamatory" remarks.

Anwar, once heir apparent to Mahathir, was sacked in 1998 and subsequently charged and convicted for sodomy and corruption. Anwar has claimed that the charges were trumped up as there was a political conspiracy against him, an allegation that Mahathir had denied.

Anwar was then sentenced to 15 years in jail for both offences and completed the six-year sentence for corruption. In September 2004, the sodomy conviction was quashed upon appeal to the Federal Court and he was subsequently freed.

In his statement of defence, Mahathir argued that the convictions of both Munawar ( right ) and Sukma for sodomy have not been overturned and that the facts of these cases proved that Anwar was involved in immoral activities.

(Since their convictions, Munawar and Sukma claimed that the charges were untrue and that they plead guilty after being tortured in police custody)

He said although the Federal Court has squashed Anwar's sodomy conviction, the country's highest court had nevertheless found that "there was evidence confirming that Anwar and Sukma ( left ) were involved in homosexual activities".

Mahathir said based on these court cases, he had no proper reason to doubt that Anwar, at the material time, was a homosexual.

Flagrant attempt

Mahathir also claimed that the suit is a flagrant attempt to re-litigate the claim of defamation which had been filed in 1999 and subsequently struck out by the High Court. This decision was later upheld by the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court.

Since the previous suit - which is substantially identical to the present claim - had been decided and determined, the "binding issue of estoppel" prevents Anwar from pursuing the present claim.

The statement of defence also argued that Mahathir's remarks at the Suhakam function were uttered on an occasion of "qualified privilege".

"In the course of his (Mahathir's) special address, the defendant responded to allegations that Malaysia had a totalitarian government under his premiership. At the conclusion of his special address, Suhakam permitted and the defendant invited questions from the floor relating to human rights in his capacity as the former premier."

Mahathir said that he was answering questions on his human rights records as premier, specifically his treatment of Anwar, who was then his deputy.

Mahathir said the questions which preceded his homosexual remarks required him to correct the media misconception that he had sacked Anwar because he had "something against" the latter.

"The defendant therefore explained why in his view it was unacceptable to have Anwar in his cabinet due to the (alleged) homosexuality activities."

It is also claimed that Mahathir's remarks is 'protected' from legal actions as it was made in a function organised by Suhakam whose proceedings and functions are "privileged" as it is established by Parliament.