A high-profile court case in Johor Bahru took a dramatic turn on Wednesday, 19 March, when a 65-year-old man, Abdul Razak Ismail, initially pleaded guilty to slapping a non-Muslim man for eating in public during Ramadan—only to later dispute the severity of the assault.
The Johor Bahru Magistrate’s Court ultimately rejected his guilty plea, leading to a fresh charge under Section 323 of the Penal Code.
The case stems from an incident on Sunday, 17 March, at a convenience store in Angsana Shopping Mall, where Abdul Razak allegedly confronted 21-year-old Elijah Ling Zhao Zhong for eating openly during the fasting month.
Videos of the confrontation went viral, with at least two Malaysian ministers condemning the alleged attack.
During the court proceedings, Abdul Razak initially admitted to slapping Ling but contested the prosecution’s claim that his actions had left bruises on the victim’s cheeks.
“I slapped him, but not hard enough to leave a bruise,” he stated, as quoted by the New Straits Times. Given this dispute over the facts, Magistrate A Shaarmini ruled that the guilty plea could not be accepted.
“We do not accept a conditional guilty plea,” the judge said, rejecting Abdul Razak’s subsequent attempt to retract his statement, citing a desire to avoid inconveniencing his son.
Before a trial date was set, the prosecution requested a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA), allowing for Abdul Razak’s temporary release while still leaving the option open for future charges.
Deputy Public Prosecutor Nur Fatihah Mohd Nizam informed the court that the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) in Putrajaya had reviewed the case and decided to amend the charge.
The DNAA ruling sparked immediate debate, with Jimmy Puah, the Member of Parliament for Tebrau, urging the AGC to clarify its reasons.
Speaking to Free Malaysia Today, Puah stressed that the case had drawn significant public interest and that the AGC should assure the public that Abdul Razak would be recharged promptly.
“What is the reason for the DNAA? Was the charge defective? When will he be recharged? This development does not inspire the confidence of the public,” Puah was quoted as saying.
The AGC later released a statement explaining that the DNAA was due to a “technical issue” with the original charge.
While the nature of the issue was not disclosed, the AGC assured the public that the matter had been resolved. “The Attorney General’s Chambers remains committed to ensuring that all parties receive fair justice in accordance with the provisions of the law,” it said, as quoted by New Straits Times.
Later that afternoon, Abdul Razak was recharged, and this time, he pleaded not guilty. The court has scheduled the next case mention for 29 April.
The incident initially came to light when Elijah shared videos on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), showing a man in a black robe confronting him and demanding to see his identity card to confirm that he was not a Muslim.
When Elijah refused, the man allegedly slapped him “several times”.
The case has drawn widespread condemnation. National Unity Minister Aaron Ago Dagang described the act as “provocative” and against Malaysia’s multicultural values. Religious Affairs Minister Na’im Mokhtar added that the incident “does not reflect the true teachings of Islam”.
If convicted, Abdul Razak could face a jail term of up to two years, a fine of up to RM2,000, or both.
The post Johor Bahru man claims trial after dramatic turn in Ramadan slap case appeared first on The Online Citizen.
