KUALA LUMPUR, July 16 — Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim has challenged Perikatan Nasional (PN) to sue him for defamation for saying that the coalition received money from gambling – deemed haram in Islam – to bankroll its campaigning for GE15 last year.

The Pakatan Harapan chairman repeated his assertion before a crowd in Guar Chempedak, Kedah last night, adding that he is willing to be taken to court if his claim that PN had received funds from gambling companies was defamatory, Sinar Ahad reported today.

“Where did this large sum of money come from? Gambling money!

"I repeat, I mentioned gambling money before, tonight I want to say that gambling money has helped [PN] a lot,” he was quoted as saying at the Madani Unity Tour and Kedah Unity Machinery Launch.

Advertisement

He also criticised PAS for claiming ignorance in the matter, saying that it did not matter if they were not part of the Cabinet.

“This whole time (PAS) has been shouting Allahu akbar, but Allahu akbar has been cast aside just like that,” he was quoted as saying.

He was reported to have alluded to the previous PN government’s move to increase the number of special draws from eight to 22 times a year, which he claimed to have come at a cost to the coalition.

Advertisement

Anwar claimed to have seen investigation files on this issue.

“I had opposed it strongly when I was the leader of the Opposition but it was unexpected that what they had done was illegal gambling,” he was quoted as saying.

He reportedly added his hopes that leaders of his “unity government”, including Umno, will not continue to be defensive, but will instead go all-out against its former allies in PN.

In May, Minister in the Prime Minister's Department (Law and Institutional Reforms) Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said said that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has not opened any investigation over claims that PN had funded its campaign in GE15 using earnings from gaming operators.

She said that the national anti-graft body had concluded that the allegation was “too general” after a detailed study was carried out.