The protracted case between Sara Omar, Manyar Parwani and Omar Marzouk has now given rise to yet another lawsuit.
This time it is Manyar Parwani who has sued Sara Omar for a number of statements in Filmmagasinet Ekko. He has also sued the media’s editor-in-chief and journalist Nicki Bruun for making the statements, which according to the lawyer are ‘grossly defamatory’, without verifying them.
It writes Filmmagasinet Ekko itself.
The media brings the statements that Sara Omar made in her time in full length, and in connection with these, they bring the lawyer’s explanations of why they find the statements defamatory.
Among other things, one of the statements is about Sara Omar believing Manyar Parwani shouted at her and monitored her.
– When my ptsd is triggered, I get off course. I can react violently and go on the offensive. And then he films me during my seizures, she told me at the time.
The lawyer writes the following about that statement in the lawsuit:
‘The statement is apt to give the impression that the plaintiff should have perpetrated psychological violence as well as filmed the defendant during the attack of ptsd.’
‘These are serious, defamatory allegations for which none of the defendants has evidence.’
At least one year in prison
The case deals with section 269 of the Criminal Code, which deals with serious accusations that are suitable for damaging the victim’s reputation, which was previously called ‘slander’.
The penalty under that section is up to two years’ imprisonment, and the lawyer has in the lawsuit demanded at least one year’s imprisonment for the three defendants, while they are also demanded compensation of 150,000 kroner. The statements are also required to be removed from the media’s website.
The original case concerns a documentary made by documentary filmmaker Manyar Parwani and comedian Omar Marzouk about author Sara Omar.
She subsequently accused Manyar Parwani of having led her behind the light in working on the documentary. She was therefore banned from bailing the recordings so that they could not be published. That decision has since been appealed to the High Court.