Search This Blog

Loading...

Saturday, February 7, 2009

KONSPIRASI ATAU KORUPSI?



MANGSA...Sebahagian daripada mereka yang ada saksikan dalam slide ini telah menjadi mangsa konspirasi peringkat tertinggi kerana mengikut arahan pegawai atasan mereka menyerang ladang persendirian bergeran tanpa tujuan khusus. Malang sekali mereka ini sedang menghadapi masa hadapan yang gelap dan maruah mereka tercalar berikutan 'SERANGAN' yang mereka lakukan. Mampukah mereka membayar saman jika tewas di Mahkamah atau terpaksa hilang pekerjaan kerana terpaksa BANKRAP disebabkan tidak mampu menjelaskan gantirugi berjuta ringgit yang dituntut Plaintif. Sampai bila Polis akan terus disalahguna untuk kepentingan Konglomerat

IC PROJEK DARI KACA MATA MASYARAKAT CINA?



嗨,沙巴论坛的沙巴汗佳礼网友们大家好像只对吃啦,喝啦,那里购物有offer啦
有兴趣讨论,。。。

而对我发现的这个关系到我们年青一代的未来影响深远的课题好像事不关己似的。。

对我们的未来真不堪设想呀。。。。。

该部落客是多产的写作者,希望大家能为沙巴州,为我们的未来而常进去
其部落网站阅读其作品内容再大家来讨论。。。

我在此贴出该部落客其中一本作品的封面供大家看看。。。


http://cforum5.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=1471642&extra=page%3D2&page=2

http://cforum5.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=1357432&extra=page%3D15&page=4

http://cforum5.cari.com.my/viewthread.php?tid=1471583&extra=page

Thursday, February 5, 2009

DAKWA SAYA DI MAHKAMAH: KAMARUDDIN



SUMPAH...Kamaruddin menunjukkan Surat Akuan Bersumpahnya serta buku yang mengandungi kegiatan haram DPIM.




Thursday, 05 February 2009 19:35

KAMARUDDIN Omar yang mendedahkan Skandal Kerakyatan Songsang pendatang haram India di Sabah mencabar Presiden Dewan Perniagaan Perindustrian India Muslim Sabah (DPIM), Datuk Baisul Khas Salman Faris mendakwanya di mahkamah kerana beliau tidak akan berganjak dengan pendiriannya.

"Saya dengan ini mengumumkan bahawa Setiausaha Agung DPIM, Mohd Ansar Maidin adalah pendatang haram India yang memalsukan keterangan diri untuk mendapatkan kad pengenalan Malaysia dengan syubahat seorang warganegara Malaysia," ujar Kamaruddin yang menunjukkan surat akuan bersumpah yang dibuatnya di Mahkamah Kota Kinabalu pada 5 Februari 2009.

Tegas Kamaruddin, Baisul adalah 'Penjenayah' kerana melindungi Warga India yang mendapat kad pengenalan projek melalui sindiket yang ditumpaskan Kerajaan Malaysia pada 1995.

Berita Lanjut sila lawat http://www.sabahkini.net

Wednesday, February 4, 2009

HASSNAR GANYANG PDRM DI MAHKAMAH?




GARI...Hassnar digari kerana membantu menduduk kampung membuat laporan polis apabila rumah mereka diroboh dalam Ops Nyah II Bersepadu atas tuduhan menghasut dan menghalang tugas polis.

TIDAK ada rakyat Sabah yang berani bersuara ketika Polis di-Raja Malaysia (PDRM) mengganas bagaikan tentera Zionis di Israel menyerang Semenanjung Gaza, namun hati kecilnya bagaikan terpanggil untuk menentang kezaliman mereka yang meroboh rumah rakyat miskin yang mendirikan rumah di atas tanah tumpah darah mereka sendiri.

"Selepas menerima telefon dari Ustaz Ridzuan, saya terus pulang ke Sandakan kerana sepanjang umur saya belum pernah melihat kerajaan begitu kejam meroboh rumah rakyat kerana Kampung BDC adalah kampung tradisi," ujar Hassnar yang terkilan kerana semua pemimpin Sabah ketika itu begitu bacul sekalipun Barisan Nasional yang memerintah Sabah di bawah sistem gilir ganti Ketua Menteri.

Menurut Hassnar, beliau dimaklumkan bahawa Kerajaan Malaysia melancarkan operasi besar-besar memburu pendatang asing tanpa izin yang dilakukan secara bersepadu yang mekanismenya termasuk meroboh koloni setinggan yang dinamakan OPS NYAH II BERSEPADU pada 26 Februari 2002.

Berita Lanjut sila lawat http://www.sabahkini.net

NOTA PROSIDING HASSNAR TENTANG POLIS DALAM OPS NYAH II BERSEPADU

MALAYSIA

IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH & SARAWAK AT SANDAKAN

JOINT TRIAL
SUIT NO S (21) –114 OF 2002

BETWEEN

HASSNAR BIN HJ MP EBRAHIM @ ASAINAR … PLAINTIFF

AND

INSPECTOR MAJARI B AWALJARI … 1ST Defendant

CHIEF INSPECTOR YUSOF B OTHMAN … 2ND Defendant

CHIEF INSPECTOR CHONG AH CHAI … 3RD Defendant

SUHAIMI HJ MOHD ALI … 4TH Defendant

CONSTABLE 14141 HARIS B.DAHRI … 5TH Defendant

L/LPL 110645 SUKUPAMU B BALAMU … 6TH Defendant

L/KPL 118361 SATAR B SEMANGOT … 7TH Defendant

CONSTABLE 141071 ROZAIMAN B RAJIEE … 8TH Defendant

CONSTABLE 13395 MOHD RIZUAN B ABD HAMID … 9TH Defendant

KPL 61649 ASMARA BIN ABD RAHMAN … 10TH Defendant

DATUK RAMLI YUSUFF … 11TH Defendant

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE … 12TH Defendant

GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA … 13TH Defendant


MALAYSIA

IN THE HIGH COURT IN SABAH & SARAWAK AT SANDAKAN

JOINT TRIAL
SUIT NO S (21) –07 OF 2003


BETWEEN


DALI @ RIDWAN BIN BAHARUN … PLAINTIFF

AND


ROSLI @ TOM … 1ST Defendant

PERSON UNKNOWN … 2ND Defendant

PERSON UNKNOWN … 3RD Defendant

SARGENT YAKUB … 4TH Defendant

YUSOF BIN OTHMAN … 5TH Defendant

MAJARI BIN AWAL JARI … 6TH Defendant

SUHAIMI BIN HJ ALI … 7TH Defendant

DATUK RAMLI YUSOF … 8TH Defendant

INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE … 9TH Defendant

GOVERNMENT OF MALAYSIA … 10TH Defendant


For Both Plaintiff : Hj Ansari Bin Abdullah

For Both Defendants : Tn. Kamaludin Bin Mohd. Said (Peguam Kanan Persekutuan)

En. Iznan Bin Ishak (Peguam Kanan Persekutuan)

NOTES OF PROCEEDINGS


Hj Ansari : May I apply for the following documents to be marked.

Bundle of Pleadings of the 1st Plaintiff – BP 1

Bundle of Pleadings of the 2nd Plaintiff – BP 2

Bundle of Documents of the 1st Plaintiff – PBD 1

Bundle of Documents of the 2nd Plaintiff – PBD 2

Bundle of Defendant’s Document – DBD


Kamaludin : No objection.


Hj Ansari: I would like to make a short opening address. I am acting for both plaintiffs who are natives of Sabah from the Sungai Community. Both were raised at Kampung Perpaduan which was later known as Kampung BDC Sandakan. Both were also married at the same kampung and they have a lot of relatives and friends in the said kampung. On the 26th February 2002, the government of Malaysia and state government of Sabah launched ‘OPS NYAH 2 BERSEPADU” to rid the state of illegal immigrants. Part of the exercise involved the demolition of houses belonging to illegal immigrants. These was stated by the then Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Abdullah Ahmad Badawi who was also the Minister of Home Affairs and by the then Chief Minister Datuk Chong Kah Kiat.

The Plaintiffs will prove during the trial that the Defendants had contravened the directive by assisting or causing to be demolished houses belonging to the Natives of Sabah. The Plaintiffs will also proved that Kampung BDC contained houses built under Natives Customary Rights on state land. The authorities had given assistance and recognition of Kampung BDC by appointing local officials such as Ketua Kampung and Imam, constructing infrastructure such as mosque, market, cat walks, and providing water, electricity and telephone services.

On about 28.02.02, the second Plaintiff Dali @ Ridzuan was arrested by the Defendants when he was in the midst of assisting the local victims of the demolition exercise. He was at that time and until today a diabetic who has been in and out of Hospital. His arrest was published in the newspapers. On the 21st March 2002, the first Plaintiff Hassnair Bin Haji Ebrahim was also arrested by the police when he assisted Malaysian Citizens whose houses were demolished by and or with the assistant of the Defendants. The 1st Plaintiff is also a diabetic and he also suffer from gout. His arrest also published in the newspapers.

Both Plaintiffs will prove during the trial that their arrest and the publication thereof were done by the Defendants’ negligence and or abuse of power clothed by malice and malafide. The case for the Plaintiffs also include acts and words uttered or published that were intended to defame as criminals and brought them to public contempt and ridicule. Lastly, we shall prove the Plaintiffs suffered damages to their person and reputation including pains and suffering and that the motive of the Defendants were to intimidate law abiding natives of sabah from standing up to abuse of powers by the Defendants. I would like to call 2nd Plaintiff first


EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF OF PW.2 : DALI @ RIDWAN BIN BAHARUN

(Affirmed and states in Bahasa Melayu)


Umur : 42 tahun (I/C No : 651103-11-5615)

Pekerjaan : Ahli Majlis Daerah Kinabatangan.

Alamat : Blk 92, No. 1256, Taman Mawar, Jln Sibuga, Sandakan.


Q : Di manakah Ridzuan dilahir dan apakah suku bangsa encik?

A : Saya dilahirkan di kampung Memiang Daerah Kinabatangan. Suku kaum Sungai.


Q : Pernahkah En. Ridzuan tinggal di kampung BDC Sandakan.

A` : Saya sejak kecil lagi tinggal di Kampung Perpaduan BDC Sandakan sejak umur saya 3 tahun. Apabila dibawa oleh arwah bapa saya yang dulunya tinggal daerah yang tidak mempunyai pasarana seperti lampu dan air dan juga sekolah dan saya berpindah ke kampung BDC pada waktu itu dan bersekolah daripada Darjah 1 di SK. Sungai Anib Sandakan. Manakala sekolah menengah St. Mary’s School.


Q : Apakah taraf pelajaran yang dicapai

A : Saya diperingkat akademik SPM dan Agama (Diploma Dakwah dan Kepimpinan)


Q : Di manakah En. Ridzuan bekerja selepas sekolah.

A : Saya pernah bertugas sebagai Pegawai Dakwah Majlis Agama Islam Sabah.

Q : Tahun.

A : Tidak berapa ingat sudah.

Q : Di manakah En. Ridzuan mendirikan rumahtangga dan bila.

A : Pada tahun 1989, 19hb Februari di Kampung BDC.


Q : Bolehkah En. Ridzuan memberikan beberapa nama orang-orang anak negeri Sabah yang pernah menetap di Kampung BDC.

A : Ya, Boleh. Yang Pertama Tuan Haji Idris Bin Haji Hassan Kadi Daerah Sandakan. (Itu sudah meninggal) Yang hidup antaranya Datuk Andi Yakin, Tuan Hj. Alipuddin Bin Hj. Puyon (Timbalan Ketua Umno Bahagian Sandakan), Dr. Dahlan Said, Dr.Ahmad Lazuardi dan Haji Ibrahim bin Harun, Habib Mohiddin (Pemilik Restoran Habeeb).


Q : Adakah kamu mengenali Plaintiff pertama (En. Hassnair Ebrahim) dan di mana dia tinggal.

A : Saya kenal sejak dari kecil dan dia tinggal di Pecky Valley.


Q : Adakah Plaintif Pertama pernah tinggal di Kampung BDC.

A : Pernah.


Q : Pada tahun 2002, adakah kamu mempunyai keluarga dan kawan-kawan suku kaum sungai yang tinggal di Kampung BDC.

A : Banyak.

Q : Boleh beri beberapa nama kepada Mahkamah yang tinggal di Kampung BDC.

A : Jempu Bin Osman, Awang Bin Ibrahim, Ketua Kampung Mohd. Lumbur, Abdullah Jaffar dan lain-lain.


Q : Adakah nama-nama yang disebut ini pendatang tanpa izin ke Sabah.

A : Pendatang dari Kinabatangan tapi bukan pendatang tanpa izin.

Q : Dalam Februari 2002, apakah pekerjaan En. Ridzuan.

A : Saya masih berniaga dan juga ahli politik.


Q : Apakah jawatan politik yang disandang pada waktu itu.

A : Yang Di Pertua Pas Kinabatangan merangkap Ketua Penerangan Pas Negeri Sabah.

Q : Apakah parti politik yang dianggotai oleh Encik Ridzuan.

A : Umno dan Barisan Nasional.

Question by Court

Q : What is the relevancy.

Hj. Ansari : We will submit that this fact shows that the evidence of this witness is not politically motivated.

SFC : I would like to have it on record to answer to my learned friend’s submission that this trial has never been as if it is a political trial.

CONTINUATION OF EXAMINATION-IN-CHIEF OF PW.2

Q : Dalam bulan Februari 2002 apakah perniagaan yang dijalankan oleh Ustaz

A : Saya buat konsultan syariah Muslim dan sebagai pendakwa.

Q : Dalam masa yang sama apakah keadaan kesihatan ustaz

A : Diabetis memang tinggi sebab saya disuntik dengan insulin.

Q : Sejak bila ustaz mengalami masalah diabetis

A : Sebelum 2002.

Q : Adakah ustaz mendapat tahu tentang operasi polis yang dinamakan OPS NYAH 2 BERSEPADU

A : Ya saya tahu.

Q : Dari mana dan apakah matlamat operasi tersebut

A : Saya tahu daripada Newspapers dan hanya dilakukan kepada pendatang tanpa izin.


Q : Pada 26 hingga 28 Februari 2002 adakah ustaz mendapat tahu tentang tindakan merobohkan rumah di kampung BDC.

A : Saya sendiri melihat.

Q : Adakah pihak polis terlibat dalam operasi tersebut.

A : Ada.

Q : Adakah rumah milik orang-orang anak negeri tempatan terlibat dalam

Operasi merobohkan rumah-rumah di kampung BDC

A : Ada banyak.

Q : Apakah perasaan ustaz apabila melihat perkara ini berlaku

A : Perasaan saya pada ketika itu saya bersetuju kepada mana-mana pihak berkuasa untuk melaksanakan operasi tetapi biarlah berlunaskan undang-undang didalam Negara kita sebagai Negara yang kita cintai agar setiap individu tidak mengira bangsa kaum agama mempunyai hak di sisi undang-undang.

Q l: Adakah sesiapa yang datang berjumpa ustaz berkenaan dengan rumah mereka diroboh atau hendak diroboh.

A : Ada dan banyak orang.

Q : Apakah tindakan ustaz apabila didatangi oleh orang-orang berkenaan.

A : Saya ada satu borang yang saya sediakan contohnya ada didalam bundle of documents.

Hj Ansari : May I refer the witness to PBD 2

SFC : No objection.

Court : Proceed. (Witness is referred to PBD 2)

Q : Bolehkah ustaz tunjukkan kepada Mahkamah dokumen mana yang dimaksudkan.

A : Muka Surat 1 hingga 7.

Q : Berapa banyakkah borang borang seperti ini disediakan dan diisi oleh ustaz atau orang lain.

A : Borangnya tidak banyak tetapi diphotostat oleh orang yang mahu berjumpa dan minta bantuan waktu itu dan mereka isi sendiri.

Q : Apakah tujuan dan maksud borang borang ini.

A : Tujuan yang pertama ialah setelah mengetahuai operasi OPS NYAH ini hanya untuk pendatang tanpa izin sahaja. Oleh yang demikian saya ingin membantu kepada pihak pihak penguasa untuk memberi maklumat kepada kerajaan ada mangsa yang belum diroboh rumah mereka pada ketika itu adalah anak negeri Sabah.

Q : Adakah ustaz menghalang mana mana pegawai awam daripada menjalankan tugas untuk merobohkan rumah setinggan yagn dimilik oleh pendatang tanpa izin mahupun penduduk tempatan.

A : Jangankan menghalang berada di tempat kejadian pada ketika itu saya pun tiada.

Q : Adakah usstaz menghasut mana-mana penduduk kampung BDC Sandakan supaya menghalang mana-mana pegawai awam menjalankan tugas untuk merobohkan rumah-rumah di kampung BDC Sandakan dalam bulan Februari 2002.

A : Apatah lagi menghasut menghalangpun saya tiada.

Haji Ansari : May I apply for pages 1 to 7 of PBD 2 to be marked as exhibit

SFC : Page 002 and the lower part of page 003 and also page 5 and page 6 of PBD 2 is not a borang which has been referred to by the witness in earlier evidence. Therefore those documents which I have mentioned here cannot be allowed to be marked as exhibit because they have not been established by the witness. The Borang the witness earlier said that he prepared the empty borang and had the borang photostated and contoh borang ada dalam bundle of document. If Yang Arif refer to all borang in PBD 2 this borang is not a borang kosong. If this document are going to be used then the maker of this borang or whoever name appeared in the borang be called give evidence that he or she had receive this borang from the plaintiff and the said borang which he or she has filled up.

Haji Ansari : I will follow the long and winding road that is needed to prove each and every documents as required by my learned friend. I will ask questions from this witness and the other witnesses to established the basis for admission. May I continue before I apply for admission later. I will now withdraw my application for admission of page 1 to 7 of PBD 2. Since it is 1 pm do we continue now or come back later.

Court : Adjourned to 2.30 this afternoon.

SIGNED BY
Y.A SANGAU GUNTING

HIGH COURT JUDGE

08/11/2006 @ 12.50 pm


08/11/2006
Court resumes at 2.40 pm

Parties as before

CONTINUATION EXAMINATION IN CHIEF OF PW .2 : DALI @ RIDWAN BIN BAHARUN
(Witness reminded his former affirmation)


SFC : Before I proceed I want to inform the court I will continue to conduct the hearing as my learned SFC Kamaludin has informed the court just before we break this morning. I also like to inform the court the defendants present in court this afternoon are only related to case 21-07-2003 as the parties in the suit by 2nd plaintiff . I also want to inform the court one of the Defendants that is the Defendant No.5 ask permission to be not in the court ( Chief Insp Yusof bin Othman ).

Hj.Ansari : May the witness refer to page 1 of PBD 2. (witness referred to page 1 of PBD 2).

Q : Siapakah yang menyediakan borang ini.

A : Saya.

Q : Siapakah yang mengisi butiran yang ditulis dalam borang ini

A` : Yang mengisi adalah orang yang tertera namanya di dalam borang.

Q : Adakah dia berada di Mahkamah.

A : Tiada

Hj.Ansari : May I apply for this document to be marked as ID 1.

SFC : No objection

Court : To be marked as I D1

Q : What are the documents shown in page 2 of PBD 2

A : Salinan Kad Pengenalan dan juga satu salinan photostat yang tertulis Kementerian Perumahan dan Kerajaan Tempatan.

Q : Siapakah memberikan dokumen ini kepada ustaz

A : Pemilik dokumen Mohamad bin Taha

Hj.Ansari : May I apply for page 2 to be marked as ID2.

SFC : No objection.

Court : To be marked as ID2.

Q : What are the document shown in page 3 of PBD2 and who prepared them

A : Borang pemilik rumah yang belum dirobohkan Kampung BDC Sandakan. Saya yang sediakan dan diisi oleh pemilik IC yang tertera di dalam borang ini Oja binti Lamanta.

Q : Darimanakah ustaz mendapatkan salinan kad pengenalan dalam muka surat 3 PBD 2

A : Ini dikepilkan bersama sewaktu pemohon menyerahkan borang dan salinan kad pengenalan pada ketika itu.

Q : I would like to apply page 3 of PBD 2 to be marked as exhibit in so far as the contents are made by this witness and also the fact that he have custody of this document. I am showing the SFC the original copy of the form stated.

Question by Court What do you mean by “ menyediakan borang”

Witness : Pada ketika itu saya difahamkan operasi nyah ini hanya untuk pendatang tanpa izin dan tidak kepada orang-orang tempatan. Oleh yang demikian, hasrat saya pada ketika itu ingin membantu pihak-pihak kerajaan agar penduduk tempatan dibela mengikut undang-undang di dalam negara ini. Saya yang membuat dan saya yang taip wording borang tersebut.

Hj.Ansari : I would like to apply page 3 of PBD 2 to be marked as exhibit in so far as the contents are made by this witness that is the type written portion and also the fact that he have custody of this document. I am showing the SFC the original copy of the form stated.

SFC : My learned friend changed his wording we agreed only the documents referred as exhibit. Page 3 contain 2 different documents, one is the form and another is a Photostated IC.

Court : PBD 2 page 3 the form is to be marked as EX.P3 only to the extent of showing the witness prepared the format.

Q : Who prepared the form that was type written as contained in page 4 of PBD 2.

A : Saya yang sediakan.

Q : May I apply type written portion as contained in page 4 of PBD 2 to be marked as Exhibit.P4

SFC : No objection

Court : To be marked as Exhibit P4 to the extent as specified.

Q : When and where were you arrested on 28 February 2002.

A : Saya pada ketika itu berada di dalam masjid selepas sembahyang asar. Kemudian saya didatangi seorang yang saya kenal sebagai SB yang memberitahu kepada saya bahawa dia punya bos ingin berjumpa. Selepas itu saya ikut dan saya dibawa ke Balai Polis di Batu 11/2. Selepas itu saya disoal siasat oleh Sarjan Yakub.

Q : Dimanakah masjid itu terletak?

A : Masjid terletak di Batu 11/2 Jalan Utara.

Q : Bolehkah ustaz mengenali anggota polis yang membawa ustaz ke balai Polis.

A : Boleh.

Q : Adakah dia berada di Mahkamah.

A : Ada.

Q : Boleh tunjuk kepada Mahkamah.

(Witness identified one of the Defendants. The Defendant referred to by the witness says his name is Brusli @ Rusli bin Abdul Nas W/C: RF/128946

SFC : The witness referred to Defendant One but he never ask for the real name when he filed the summons until now. But the Defendant who came to court he admits he is the one the plaintiff referred to as the Defendant One.

Hj.Ansari : According to the paragraph 13 of the statement of claim the first and second Defendant ask the plaintiff to accompany them to the special branch office. This witness is the proper person to inform the Court whether this was the person Rosli @ Tom that was mentioned as the 1st Defendant in the suit. My question is adakah pegawai ini yang dimaksudkan sebagai Defendant pertama Rosli @ Tom dalam saman.

A : Ya.

Q : Adakah Defendant yang kedua dan ketiga yang tidak dinamakan berada di mahkamah pada petang ini.

A : Ya.

Q : Bolehkah ustaz mengesahkan siapakah yang bersama Defendant pertama yang membawa ustaz daripada masjid ke pejabat cawangan khas?

A : Saya tidak tahu namanya tetapi yang memakai tali leher. (Saksi menunjukkan pegawai yang bersama Defendant pertama. Pegawai yang ditunjuk mengatakan nama beliau ialah Ahmad Kassim bin Atan ).

Q : Adakah kedua-dua pegawai yang dicam oleh ustaz menyatakan yang ustaz telah ditahan atau ditangkap?

A : Tidak ada.

Q : Setibanya di pejabat cawangan khas di Batu 11/2 Jln Sim-Sim, apa yang berlaku?

A : Saya pada ketika itu berjumpa dengan pegawai penyiasat ketika itu Sarjan Yakub.

Q ; Adakah sarjan Yakub menyoalsiasat ustaz?

A : Ada.

Q : Adakah sarjan yakub berada di Mahkamah?

A : Ada.

Q : Boleh tunjukkan kepada mahkamah?

A : Ya. (4th Defendant identified).

Q : Selepas disoalsiasat oleh Defendant keempat apa yang terjadi?

A : Selepas itu saya dibawa ke Balai Polis Daerah Sandakan yang terletak di Bandar.

Q : Sebelum dibawa ke Balai Polis Daerah Sandakan, adakah ustaz diberitahu oleh mana-mana anggota yang ustaz ditahan atau ditangkap?


A : Tidak ada.

Q : Sebelum dibawa ke Balai Polis Bandar Sandakan, adakah ustaz berpendapat bahawa ustaz masih dalam keadaan bebas dan boleh bergerak ke mana sahaja?

A : Ya.

Q : Sebelum ustaz dibawa keluar oleh anggota polis daripada masjid adakah ustaz memegang apa-apa dokumen ?

A : Ada. Kad Pengenalan.


Q : Semasa ustaz dibawa dari masjid adakah apa-apa dokumen yang diambil atau dirampas oleh anggota-anggota polis berkenaan?


A : Ada. Borang.




Q : Adakah borang-borang tersebut borang kosong ataupun borang yang sudah diisi.?


A : yang sudah diisi.




Q : Bolehkah ustaz menyatakan kepada mahkamah berapa banyakkah borang yang dirampas atau diambil oleh anggota polis?


A : Tidak ingat jumlahnya.




Q : Adakah borang-borang tersebut sama dengan borang-borang dalam Exhibit P.3 dan Exhibit P.4.


A : Sama.




Q : Adakah borang-borang tersebut dikembalikan pada bila-bila masa selepas ditahan?


A : Tiada.




Q : Adakah ustaz menerima apa-apa pengesahan atau borang rampasan polis sewaktu atau selepas borang-borang tersebut dirampas?


A ; Tiada.



Q : Apa yang terjadi setibanya ustaz sampai di balai Polis Bandar Sandakan?


A : Pada ketika itu saya duduk saja di kerusi. Setelah itu seorang pegawai keselamatan keluar dan menyatakan kepada saya, saya ditahan.



Q ; Siapakah nama pegawai tersebut dan apakah yang dia nyatakan kepada ustaz?


A : Pegawai tersebut Inspektor Majari dan dikatakan awak ditahan.



Q : Adakah ustaz diberitahu apakah sebab atau kesalahan yang dilakukan oleh ustaz sewaktu Inspektor Majari menyatakan ustaz ditahan?


A : Tidak ingat.




Q : Selepas Ustaz ditahan oleh Insp Majari, adakah ustaz disoalsiast oleh mana-mana pegawai polis?


A : Ada.




Q : Siapakah nama pegawai polis yang menyoalsiasat ustaz?


A : Inspector Yusof.




Q : Apakah fahaman ustaz kesalahan yang ustaz lakukan berdasarkan soalsiasat oleh Sarjan Yakub dan Inspektor Yusof?



A : Waktu siasatan Sarjan Yakub saya tidak nampak apa-apa kesalahan. Waktu disiasat oleh Inspektor Yusof baru saya faham saya dituduh menghasut.



Q : Bolehkah ustaz jelaskan apakah atau siapakah yang dihasut oleh ustaz menurut soalsiasat polis?


A : Orang kampung penduduk kampung BDC.




Q : Bolehkah ustaz merujuk kepada muka surat 8 PBD2 dan beritahu mahkamah sama ada tuduhan yang terkandung dalam laporan ini iaitu “menghasut penduduk-penduduk kampung BDC supaya menghalang pegawai-pegawai awam menjalankan tugas untuk merobohkan rumah-rumah setinggan di kampung tersebut”?

(witness shown muka surat 8 PBD 2)


A : Apa lagi menghasut menghalang pun tiada.




Hj.Ansari : May I apply for page 8 of PBD 2 to be marked as Exhibit.P5


SFC : I just want to know how the witness obtained this document


Hj.Ansari : Under section 108 A CPC any police report that is certified by the OCPD of the District is admissible. If my learned friend want to find out where the documents come from, he can do so by cross examination.


SFC : I don’t object to the police report to be tendered as exhibit but subject to the cross.


Court : Page 8 of PBD 2 to be marked as Exhibit P.5 subject to cross examination.



Q : Bolehkah ustaz mengesahkan kepada Mahkamah samaada muka surat 9 dan 10 DBD 1 merupakan salinan laporan polis yang ustaz buat berkenaan tangkapan pada 28 Februari 2002.

(witness shown DBD 1 pages 9 and 10)


A : Ya.


Q : Adakah isi dan kandungan laporan ini benar?


A : Benar.



Hj.Ansari : May I apply pages 9 and 10 of DBD 1 to be marked as Exhibit P.6A and P.6B accordingly.


SFC : No objection. Subject to cross-examination.


Court : Pages 9 and 10 of DBD 1 to be marked as Exhibit P.6A and 6B respectively.


Q : Selepas ustaz ditangkap oleh Defendant ke enam Inspektor Majari adakah ustaz memberitahu mana-mana anggota polis tentang masalah kesihatan ustaz?


A : Ada.



Q : Apa yang ustaz beritahu dan kepada siapa?


A : Saya bagi tahu kepada yang menjaga lokap saya menghidap penyakit diabetis yang perlu untuk injection insulin.



Q : Menurut paragraph 15 statement of claim, ustaz mengatakan ada memberitahu Inspektor Majari bahawa ustaz seorang diabetic. Dimana dan bilakah ustaz berbuat demikian?

(Witness shown statement of claim paragraph 15 of BP 2)


A : Sudah ditahan sebelum masuk lokap.




Q : Adakah ustaz menerima suntikan atau rawatan pada malam 28 Februari 2002 sewaktu dalam tahan polis?


A : Ada.



Q : Dimana?


A : Didalam lokap selepas isteri saya membawa insulin.



Q : Berapa lamakah ustaz disoalsiasat selepas ditahan pada 28 Februari 2002?


A : Saya tidak ingat sebab tiada jam pada waktu itu.



Q : Adakah ustaz diberikan makan dan minum pada malam 28 Februari 2002.


A ; Tidak ingat.



Q : Apa terjadi pada pagi esok hari 1 Mac 2002?


A : Saya dibawa ke Mahkamah.



Q : Didalam perjalanan ke Mahkamah adakah ustaz didalam jagaan polis dan apakah kenderaan yang digunakan?


A : Saya berjalan kaki dan digari bersama pegawai polis ke Mahkamah.



Q : Apa yang berlaku di Mahkamah Majistret Sandakan pada waktu tersebut?


A : Waktu itu saya ingat saya bersama peguam di kamar hakim.


Hj.Ansari I just noticed at paragraph 9 of the Defendant Defence in BP 2 that the witness was produced on 29 February 2002. However I will maintain that the date was 1st of Mac 2002 as stated in the statement of claim.


SFC : It just a typing error.


Court : proceed.



Q : Apakah permohonan yang dibuat oleh Defendant di Mahkamah Majistret Sandakan pada hari berikutnya 1 Mac 2002?


A : Untuk tambah reman.



Q : Berapa lama?


A : Tidak ingat.



Q : Adakah Majistret berkenaan meluluskan permohonan sambung reman yang dibuat oleh Defendant ke atas ustaz?


A : Saya tidak berapa ingat sama ada lulus ataupun tidak tapi pada petangnya pihak polis yang memohon kepada Mahkamah supaya saya dibebaskan atas jaminan polis.



Q : Sebelum ustaz dibebaskan adakah ustaz dibawa oleh mana-mana anggota polis untuk membuat serbuan dan bongkaran ke atas rumah ustaz?


A : Ada.



Q : Siapa yang membuat bongkaran dan bilakah bongkaran dilakukan?


A : Saya ingat sebelum saya dibebaskan Inspektor Yusof bersama saya tidak ingat ada satu dua orang kakitangan polis tidak beruniform membawa saya ke rumah saya untuk mencari, saya pun tidak tahu apa yang dicari, selepas itu mereka balik dan membawa saya semula ke Balai.


Q : Adakah tangkapan dan penahanan ustaz dimasukkan di dalam Akhbar oleh pihak Polis?


A : Saya ternampak di Berita Harian ada ditulis nama saya tapi binnya Abdullah ditahan di bawah Akta Hasutan.


Q : Selepas ustaz ditangkap dan laporan akhbar dikeluarkan apakah tanggapan atau pandangan orang ramai terhadap ustaz?


A ; Barangkali paling kecil pun sebagai seorang penjenayah kepada bangsa, agama dan negara.



Q : Adakah laporan yang ustaz buat di atas tangkapan polis seperti terkandung dalam Exhibit P.6A dan P.6B muka surat 9 dan 10 DBD 1 disiasat oleh pihak polis?


A : Tidak ada.



Q : Adakah pada bila-bila masa pihak polis atau mana-mana Defendant memohon maaf kepada ustaz di atas kejadian penangkapan dan tahanan pada 28 Februari 2002?


A : Ada satu orang.



Q : Siapa?


A : Rosli @ Tom dan saya sudah maafkan.



Q : Bolehkah ustaz melihat kepada paragraph 25 hingga 28 penyata tuntutan dan nyatakan kepada Mahkamah samaada ustaz masih berpegang kepada perkara-perkara yang disebut?

(witness is shown paragraph 25 to 28 of BP 2)

(Paragraphs 25 to 28 SOC is shown to witness)


A : Ya.



Q : Adakah ustaz masih mahu mahkamah memberikan tuntutan-tuntutan yang tercatit dibawah perenggan 29 hingga 35 Statement of claim.

(witness shown paragraphs 29 to 35 SOC)


A : Ya



Hj.Ansari : may I apply for the hearing to be adjourned to tomorrow in view of the time now that is 4.50pm.


SFC : I request for the Notes of proceeding for this afternoon.


Court : Adjourned to tomorrow at 11.30 am in view of the number of cases scheduled to be heard in the morning.







Signed by

YA Sangau Gunting,

High Court Judge

08/11/2006 @ 4.55pm



09/11/2006

Court Resumes at 11.35 am

Parties as before.


CONTINUATION EXAMINATION IN CHIEF OF PW.1 DALI @ RIDWAN BIN BAHARUN

(Witness reminded he is still on oath)


Hj.Ansari May the witness be referred to page 9 and 10 of PBD 2



Q Siapakah yang membuat dan menandatangani surat ini?

A Saya.


Q Bolehkah ustaz cam atau tunjukkan kepada mahkamah siapakah penama di atas?

A (The witness points to 6th Defendant )


Q Nama kedua Cif Inspektor Yusof bin Othman

A (The witness points to 5th Defendant )


Q Bolehkah ustaz cam ACP Suhaimi Hj. Mohamad Ali?

A (The witness points to 7th Defendant )


Hj.Ansari May the record shows that the 8th Defendant Datuk Ramli Yusof is not in court and therefore he cannot be identified by this witness. I would like to apply for Pages 9 and 10 of PBD 2 to be marked as Exhibit P.7.


SFC No Objection


Court Pages 9 and 10 of PBD 2 to be marked as Exhibit P.7


Q Adakah ustaz menerima apa-apa jawapan daripada 4 penama yang disebut dalam surat ini ataupun oleh peguam negara yang telah diberikan salinan surat ini?

A Tidak ada.


Hj.Ansari I would like to call the people whose houses were demolished or about to be demolished at kampung BDC that had approached the witness for assistance. The purpose is to show the Court who are these people and some of them will be call as witnesses.


SFC My learned friend asked to identify the victims who asked for the advice and assistance from plaintiff on the 28 Februari 2002 based on paragraph 10 of statement of claim. My learned friend must prove first through the plaintiff’s examination in chief the name of the victims before they can be identified.


Hj.Ansari According to the pleadings paragraph 10 until 12 of the statement of claim it was stated that several relatives and other victims had seeked the assistance of this witness. This was denied by the Defendant and they want to put the plaintiff to strict proof thereof. The Defendant should have apply for further and better particulars under the rules of the High Court if they want to know who these people are. The names was not stated in the pleadings because there is no necessity to do so and also to protect the witnesses. I therefore submit this witness should be allowed to tell the court whether these are the people who approached him and he should be able to give their name or their nick name as they were known in the kampung. Depending on the cross examination I will be calling these people to give evidence as to whether they did approached this witness for help. My learned friend SFC is at liberty to cross examine this witness and whoever might be called in support of the fact that this witness was approached for help.


SFC I would like to apply my learned friend statement just now. We believe that the plaintiff should mentioned the name of the victims support by documents before they can be identify by him. We also like to point to the Court the remarks that my learned friend in the previous statement “ The names was not stated in the pleadings because there is no necessity to do so and also to protect the witnesses” has no basis at all. I would like for the court to request the plaintiff or my learned friend ask the plaintiff during examination in chief and then identify the victims.


Hj.Ansari I have no problem with asking this witness the names of those who came to see him and then for that particulars person to come one by one for identification. I also like to say that my learned friend is jumping the gun by stating that my statement is unwarranted. I did not state that these people are being threatened or likewise.


Court Proceed with the examination in chief.


Q Bolehkah ustaz berikan nama sebenar atau nama yang digunakan di kampung BDC atas orang-orang yang dating untuk minta bantuan kerana rumah mereka diroboh?

A Ada yang saya boleh sebut nama penuh, nama samaran dan ada yang saya kenal muka nama tidak ingat.


Q Bolehkah ustaz berikan nama penuh atau nama samaran?

A Boleh. Abdullah bin Jaafar, Masrun bin Jaafar, Awang bin Ibrahim, Jempu bin Osman, Pak Cik Arfah, Pak Cik Tambasal dan itu sahaja.


Q May I call these six persons for identification.


SFC No Objection


Court Proceed.


Q Boleh tunjukkan yang mana satu Abdullah bin Jaafar?

A Pertama dari Kanan. Yang kedua Masrun bin Ingau, Yang ketiga Pak Cik Arfah, Yang Keempat Pak Cik Tambasal, Yang Kelima Pak Cik Awang bin Ibrahim, Yang Keenam Pak Cik Jempu bin Osman.


(Pertama dari kanan says he is Abdullah bin Jaafar, Kedua says he is Masrun bin Ingau, Ketiga says he is Arfah Salim, Keempat says he is Tambasal bin Rustam, Kelima says he is Awang bin Ibrahim and Yang Keenam says he is Jempu bin Osman.


Hj.Ansari May the witnesses be released to the witness room.


SFC No Objection


Q Mengikut pengetahuan ustaz adakah diantara enam orang yang telah dicam merupakan pendatang tanpa izin?

A Tidak ada.


Q Kelmarin ustaz mengatakan anggota polis yang menahan ustaz telah merampas borang-borang semasa dimasjid BDC. Adakah diantara enam orang ini borang mereka termasuk dalam borang-borang yang dirampas?

A Saya tidak ingat.


Q Ustaz menyatakan bahawa ada rakan-rakan yang membantu mengambil nama dan butiran peribadi mangsa-mangsa pembongkaran rumah di kampung BDC dalam para 12 statement of claim. Bolehkah ustaz memberikan beberapa nama kepada mahkamah?

A Yang saya ingat satu nama sahaja iaitu Abdul Muis bin Sulaiman.


Q Adakah ustaz berhubung dengan plaintiff pertama Hassnar Ebrahim berkenaan dengan pembongkaran rumah?

A Ada


Q Bila dan cara apa?

A Masa sudah tidak berapa ingat tetapi saya menggunakan telefon handset saya kepada saudara Hassnar Ebrahim yang saya difahamkan ketika itu dia berada di Johor Baharu urusan perniagaan.


Hj.Ansari No further question.

Cross Examination by SFC.

Q Semalam pada sessi pagi soal pertama ustaz ada menyebut pernah tinggal di kampung BDC. Boleh beritahu mahkamah tempoh ustaz tinggal di kampung BDC?

A Sejak tahun 1968 hingga 1997 lebih kurang.


Q Boleh ustaz beritahu mahkamah rumah yang ustaz duduk di kampung BDC ketika itu milik siapa?

A Sebelum saya kahwin saya tinggal di Jambatan Jazz Blues mahligai milik Allahyarham Baharum bin Nasir ayah saya. Setelah itu saya membeli rumah allahyarham Nasip bin Awang Jambatan di depan Jalanraya kampung BDC.


Q Boleh ustaz beritahu mahkamah rumah-rumah yang ustaz sebutkan tadi berada di sebelah mana di Kampung BDC, iaitu sebelah darat ataupun di pantai menghadap laut ketika itu?

A Rumah allahyarham bapa saya ditengah-tengah tidak di darat dan tidak juga di tepi laut. Rumah saya ditepi jalanraya.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz seorang anak negeri Sabah?

A Saya orang Sungai native title anak watan negeri Sabah.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada Mahkamah dalam pengetahuan ustaz ketika tinggal di kampung BDC adakah tapak kampung BDC dari jalanraya menghadap laut adalah tanah anak negeri?

A Saya hanya tinggal di rumah arwah bapa saya yang telah disuruh oleh pemimpin orang sungai Allahyarham Pangiran Galpam bin Pengiran Indar dan saya yakin tanah ini adalah tanah anak negeri.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz mempunyai sebarang dokumen ataupun pernah melihat sebarang dokumen mengatakan kampung BDC di mana ustaz tinggal pada ketika itu adalah tanah anak negeri?

A Saya melihat hanya cukai pintu rumah arwah ayah saya yang didepan tulisannya LBS Lembaga Bandaran Sandakan untuk tujuan kemudahan asas lampu dan air ketika itu.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah pernahkah ustaz memegang geran tapak rumah dimana ustaz tinggal ketika itu?

A Saya masih menyimpan dokumen pembelian rumah saya pada ketika itu dan ada dalam simpanan saya sekarang.


Q Soalan saya tadi ialah adakah ustaz pernah memegang geran tapak rumah dimana ustaz tinggal ketika itu?

A Dokumen yang saya pegang saya tidak mengetahui status geran atau bukan tetapi kebenaran daripada pihak berkuasa tempatan saya pegang sampai hari ini di dalam tangan saya.


Q Tadi ustaz ada katakan membeli sebuah rumah di kampung BDC. Boleh beritahu Mahkamah adakah rumah ustaz juga diroboh dalam Operasi NYAH 2 BERSEPADU ketika itu?

A Rumah saya tidak terlibat kerana terbakar diambil takdirnya Allah.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah yang enam pihak yang tadi ustaz camkan di Mahkamah adakah mereka pernah menunjuk kepada ustaz sebarang geran tanah/tapak rumah yang mereka duduki di kampung BDC.


Hj.Ansari I object to that question because it is unfair since the land law of Sabah provided for native customary right to held on land that had been built on within three years as provided for under Sec.15(e) of the Sabah land ordinance(Cap 68). It is also recognize under Sec.88 of the same ordinance and under the Federal Court decision in the case of Borneo Housing (1996) 2 MLJ 12 that there is no necessity for registration of native land, interest, title or claim in any land as opposed to other types of lands. In other words the highest court in the country and also the land ordinance recognize native customary right and interest which are not documented.


SFC My question to the witness whether he has any knowledge or seen any documentation belonging to the persons that he has identified in the court the people who seek for his help and assistance. My learned friend can re examination the witness and later on can submit the law during the submission. I ask from the court for the witness to answer the question that I impose before my learned counsel objected.


Court The question is allowed. It’s up to the witness to answer whether or not he has been shown any grant title by those identified by him earlier. With respect I quite agree with learned SFC that the learned Counsel for the plaintiff to raise what ever question necessary in re examination. The withness to answer the question


Q Ustaz saya akan ulang soalan tadi iaitu “Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah yang enam pihak yang tadi ustaz camkan di Mahkamah adakah mereka pernah menunjuk kepada ustaz sebarang geran tanah/tapak rumah yang mereka duduki di kampung BDC”.

A Tidak ada.


SFC may I apply for the hearing to be adjourned this afternoon.


Hj.Ansari No objection


Court Ajourned to 2.30 this afternoon.


SIGNED BY


YA SANGAU GUNTING

HIGH COURT JUDGE

9/11/2006 @ 1.15pm


09/11/2006

Court Resumes at 2.30 pm

Parties as before.


CONTINUATION CROSS EXAMINATION OF PW. 1

(Witness reminded he is still on oath)


Hj.Ansari May I be allowed to say a few words before we proceed. I have been inform by some of witnesses that one police personel by the name Hj.Asmara saying among other things “kamu mahu lawan sama kami”. This sort of words being said by police personnel in uniform made this witnesses feel that they are not free to give evidence. I therefore request the learned SFC advice the said personnel and others from communicating with my witnesses. If this thing goes on I will personally lodge a report with the police and the federal AG. Any Malaysian citizen should have a right to go to court and give evidence on their own free will.


SFC First I would like to find out to the court My learned Counsel suppose to make proper complaint any behaviour by any police personnel or Defendants or officer in uniform to us. Base on this proper complaint I can refer to my senior officer and to their OCPD in charge of Balai Polis Sandakan. Just to say to the court that this police officer make a remarks without identifying whom the remarks was make to. As your honour know there is a lot of villagers peoples (orang kampung) outside this court at the corridor and also in the witness room beside this court room. For my lord knowledge, some of these villagers people (orang kampung) is an old friend of officer Encik Asmara. I also like to inform the court I already request my witnesses including En Asmara to stay at the witness room beside Session Court 1.


Hj.Ansari I was informed some of my witnesses were interrogated by the said police personnel as to the ownership of this land indispute and there is nothing friendly about this and these people are not friends of Haji Asmara. After we adjourned today I will bring these people to see the learned SFC.


SFC This police is a personnel working at this court and also one of the Defendant in the second case. I would like a proper complaint stating the villagers which the remarks was made to and the remarks made by this police personnel.


Court Both parties to look into the matter and acertin an actual situation so that a appropriate steps could be taken if necessary.


CONTINUATION CROSS EXAMINATION OF PW. 1

(Witness reminded he is still on oath)


Q Semalam di sessi pagi soal utama ustaz telah memberikan beberapa nama orang-orang anak negeri Sabah yang pernah menetap di kampung BDC masih ingat?

A Masih ingat.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan apa yang dimaksudkan sebagai orang-orang anak negeri Sabah tersebut?

A Yang pertama anak orang Sungai, anak orang Suluk, anak orang Bajau, anak orang Idaan, anak orang Dusun, anak orang Murut, anak orang Kadazan. Ada 70 kaum etnik negeri Sabah.


Q Inikah yang dimaksudkan oleh Ustaz sebagai anak orang negeri Sabah?

A Ya.


Q Boleh ustaz beritahu mahkamah Datuk Andi Yakin dan Habib Mohiddin (Pemilik Restoran Habeeb) anak negeri Sabah kaum mana?

A Habib Mohiddin yang saya tahu berketurunan India dan isterinya orang Sungai namanya Hjjh Kuya. Datuk Andi Yakin asal keturunannya Bugis beranak menantu orang Sungai.


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakana nama yang ustaz maksudkan tadi iaitu Datuk Andi Yakin dan Habib Mohiddin bukanlah orang-orang bukan anak negeri Sabah?

A Saya setuju ianya warga negara Malaysia.


Q Saya tanya setuju atau tidak nama yang yang ustaz maksudkan tadi iaitu Datuk Andi Yakin dan Habib Mohiddin bukanlah orang-orang bukan anak negeri Sabah?

A No comment.


Q Pada tahun 2002 dimana ustaz menetap?

A Blok 92, No.1256 Taman Mawar, Sandakan.


Q Ustaz pada sessi soal utama ada mengatakan jawatan disandang pada waktu itu ialah Yang DiPertua PAS Kinabatangan merangkap Ketua Penerangan PAS Negeri Sabah?

A Betul


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan pernah atau tidak ustaz mempunyai pengetahuan bahawa penduduk kampung BDC pernah diarahkan mengosongkan rumah mereka sebelum operasi NYAH 2 BERSEPADU dilancarkan?

A Tidak ada. Hanya yang saya tahu satu papan tanda yang bertulis oleh Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan ‘dilarang mendirikan rumah’ yang saya ingat lebih kurang wordingnya.


Q Pada Februari 2002 boleh ustaz memaklumkan kepada mahkamah didalam pengetahuan ustaz berapa rumah yang ada di Kampung BDC?

A Jumlahnya agak banyak Cuma saya tidak dapat menganggarkan berapa banyak jumlah rumah pada ketika itu.


Q Tadi semasa sessi soal balas ustaz mengatakan ustaz berpindah dari kampung BDC lebih kurang tahun 1997, betul?

A Betul.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah sejak 1997 sehingga Februari 2002 kekerapan ustaz berada diKampung BDC.

A Kampung BDC senonim kepada saya. Tidak boleh disebutkan kekerapan. Ianya selalu kerana saya banyak cukup kenal kawan-kawan dan sering sembahyang di Masjid Al Murakabbah Batu 11/2 cuma tidak jadi Imam tidak jadi Khatib.


Q Adakah ustaz kenal semua penduduk di kampung BDC?

A Agak tidak relevan kalau saya menyatakan saya kenal semua orang kerana fitrah manusia bukan lengkap tetapi ada orang yang saya kenal rapat ada orang yang mungkin kenal nama saya tapi tak pernah jumpa saya.


SFC May I refer the witness to Exhibit ID 1 in PBD2

(witness shown ID1)

Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada Mahkamah bilakah ustaz mula mengedarkan contoh borang dalam Exhibit ID1.

A Tarikhnya saya lupa tetapi saya masih ingat sebelum saya dibawa oleh Special Branch Rosli @ Tom pada hari itu sekitar jam 9.00 pagi hingga selepas sembahyang zohor.


Q Bila ustaz mula edarkan borang kosong seperti dalam ID1 ?

A Jam tepatnya tidak berapa ingat tetapi sekitar pagi jam 9.00 ke atas.


Q Sila ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah bagaimana borang kosong seperti dalam ID1 diedarkan kepada penduduk kampung BDC?

A Borang itu tidak banyak tetapi bila dihantar semula kepada saya terlalu banyak macam goreng pisang panas.


Q Saya tanya ustaz tadi bagaimana borang kosong seperti dalam ID1 diedarkan kepada penduduk kampung BDC?

A Ianya tidak diedarkan, penduduk ambil melihat dokumen borang ini. Mereka mengambil daripada saya di Masjid ketika itu.


Q Bagaimana penduduk kampung BDC tahu terdapat borang tersebut dengan ustaz di Masjid ketika itu?

A Mereka tahu saya sering ke Masjid dan mereka juga tahu saya sering memberikan pandangan kepada penduduk apa yang kita tinggal didalam negara ini harus meminta bantuan kepada kerajaan agar kehidupan kita dilindungi. Jadi ucapan pada ketika itu diyakini serta dihormati.


Q Apa yang ustaz maksudkan dengan ucapan? Adakah ustaz memberi ucapan di Masjid tersebut?

A Bincang.


Q Adakah ustaz menyediakan borang kosong terlebih dahulu sebelum ke Masjid ketika itu?

A Belum.

Q Dimanakah ustaz menyediakan borang tersebut dan bila?

A Dibuat dalam komputer saya, saya taip sendiri selepas masyarakat bincang apa yang patut dibuat kerana pada ketika itu operasi meroboh rumah telah berlaku. Sila lihat wording borang tersebut. “Borang Pemilik Rumah Yang Belum Dirobohkan Kampung BDC Sandakan” kerana saya membaca suratkhabar operasi robohan rumah hanya dilaksanakan kepada penduduk tanpa izin bukan kepada penduduk tempatan yang diarahkan oleh sekarang yang menjadi Perdana Menteri Malaysia dan pada ketika itu Ketua Menteri Sabah Datuk Chong Kah Kiat.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah selepas borang ini dikembalikan oleh penduduk kampung adakah ustaz merekod dalam mana-mana buku?

A Borang ini dihimpun dan saya cuba merekod tetapi ianya tidak terlaksana sebab petang sudah dibawa saya ke balai Polis.


Q Adakah borang ini ditandatangani oleh pihak yang tercatit di dalam borang dihadapan ustaz ketika penyerahan itu?

A Ada yang didepan saya, ada yang dikembalikan kepada saya sudah bertandatangan.


Q Adakah ustaz melantik mana-mana ajen ketika itu untuk menguruskan borang ini?

A Tidak ada.


Q Adakah ustaz dilantik sebagai wakil kampung BDC untuk menguruskan sebarang tuntutan pampasan ganti rugi bagi pihak orang kampung ketika itu?

A Secara lisan mereka memohon bantuan dan pandangan kepada saya.


Q Adakah ustaz tahu ketika itu mana-mana agensi kerajaan negeri dilantik untuk mengurus sebarang aduan mengenai pampasan ganti rugi sekiranya ada?

A Saya tidak tahu.


Q Adakah ustaz tahu atau dalam pengetahuan ustaz majlis Perbandaran Sandakan menubuhkan pejabat sementara di Kampung BDC untuk urusan aduan atau pampasan ganti rugi untuk penduduk kampung BDC?

A Jangankan MPS membuat satu agensi bulu hidung mana-mana yang berwajib tidak ku nampak.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz mempunyai pengetahuan operasi merobohkan rumah di kampung BDC dilaksanakan oleh Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan pada ketika itu?

A Saya pada ketika itu tidak tahu. Itulah sebabnya borang ini dibuat dengan tujuan untuk bertemu dengan President atau Setiausaha Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan pada ketika itu dapat mencari jalan penyelesaian kepada pemilik anak negeri Sabah.


Q Dari masjid Al Murahkabah boleh ustaz nampak pihak-pihak yang merobohkan rumah di kampung BDC?

A Tidak nampak.


SFC May I refer the witness to BP2 paragraph 8 of the statement of claim. (witness shown BP 2 paragraph 8)

Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakan ustaz tidak nampak sebarang proses perobohan oleh polis atau Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan ataupun mana-mana badan seperti yang kita maksudkan di dalam para 8 kenyataan tersebut?

(Paragraph 8 SOC interpreted to the witness)

A Ya setuju.


SFC I will like to witness refer to BP2 para 9 of statement of claim.

(witness shown to BP2 para 9 of statement of claim)

(para 9 SOC interpreted to the witness)


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakan ustaz tidak tahu rumah yang dirobohkan dimana kepunyaan native dan rakyat Malaysia tanpa alasan munasabah ketika itu?

A Kurang jelas soalannya.


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakan ustaz tidak tahu rumah yang dirobohkan dimana kepunyaan native dan rakyat Malaysia tanpa alasan munasabah yang dirujuk kepada para 9 kenyataan tuntutan adalah tanpa alasan munasabah ketika itu?

A Kurang faham.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah tindakan memfailkan saman 21-07-2003 difailkan oleh ustaz sendiri pada bulan Februari 2003.

A Ya.


Q Boleh ustaz beritahu mahkamah siapa yang menyediakan penyata tuntutan yang difailkan di Mahkamah ini yang ditandatangani oleh ustaz pada 27 Februari 2003?

A Saya lupa-lupa ingat sudah siapa itu.


Q Sila maklum kepada Mahkamah adakah ustaz yang menyediakan kenyataan tuntutan ini sendiri iaitu menaip dan juga menfailkan di Mahkamah.

A Saya yang membawa segala dokumen ini ke Mahkamah. Barangkali ada malaikat tolong.


Q Sila maklum mahkamah samada ustaz yang menyediakan dokumen ini.

A Bukan.


Q Adakah salinan Bahasa Malaysia untuk kenyataan tuntutan ini disediakan oleh pihak lain untuk dirujuk kepada ustaz.

A Ada orang memberi kefahaman kepada saya.


Q Ustaz faham mengenai penyata tuntutan ini.

A Faham dan telah diterangkan oleh saudara saya Hassnar Ebrahim.


Q Pada tarikh 28 Februari 2002 semasa ustaz ditahan dan juga tarikh 1 Mac 2002 ustaz dilepaskan apakah penyakit yang ustaz ada maklum kepada Defendant keenam iaitu Cif Inspektor Majari bin Awaljari?

A Diabetes.


Q Diabetes sahaja?.

A Diabetes sahaja yang lain tidak ingat.


Q Adakah ustaz ketika itu mempunyai penyakit lain?

A Untuk makluman ibu segala penyakit adalah diabetes. Jadi bila mana diabetes ada semua kemungkinan penyakit yang lain akan menjadi anak pinaknya.

Q Boleh ustaz sahkan kepada mahkamah pada tarikh ustaz ditahan 28 Februari 2002 ustaz cuma maklumkan diabetes sahaja?

A Diabetes dan penyakit lain saya tidak ingat apa yang saya sebut.


Q Semalam semasa sessi petang soal utama ustaz bersetuju dengan para 25 hingga 28 penyata tuntutan, betul?

(shown to witness)

A Betul.


SFC May I refer to BP2 para 28. (Shown to witness)


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakana ustaz tidak mengalami penyakit gaut seperti yang didakwa didalam para 28 (b)semasa ditahan?

A Ulang soalan.


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakana ustaz tidak mengalami penyakit gaut seperti yang didakwa didalam para 28 (b)semasa ditahan?

A Tidak setuju.


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakana ustaz tidak mengalami penyakit gastric seperti yang didakwa di para 28 ©?

A Tidak setuju.


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakan ustaz tidak pernah memaklumkan kepada Defendant keenam pada 28 Februari 2002 bahawa ustaz mengalami penyakit gaut ataupun gastrik?

A Tadi saya sudah maklumkan tidak ingat.

SFC May I refer to plaintiff Bundle DBD1 Exhibit P.6 A and P6B.

(witness shown DBD1 Exhibit P6A and P6B)


Q Ustaz sila maklumkan kepada mahkamah report polis yang ditandakan sebagai P6B adakah disediakan oleh ustaz sendiri?

A Ya.


Q Pada sessi soal utama petang semalam ustaz mengakui report polis yang di Exhibitkan didalam P6A dan P6B adalah kepunyaan ustaz?

A Ya.


Q Sebelum dokumen ini ditandakan sebagai Exhibit P6A dan P6B ustaz telah membacanya terlebih dahulu?

A Ya.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah berapa lama ustaz ditahan oleh pihak polis dan tarikh ditahan dan dilepaskan?

A Tarikhnya lupa tapi lebihkurang 1 hari 1 malam sahaja.


Q Boleh ustaz rujuk kepada P6B barisan pertama.

(witness refers to P6B barisan pertama)


Q Sila maklumkan tarikh yang ustaz tulis didalam barisan pertama tersebut?

A 28 Februari 2002


Q Setuju atau tidak saya katakan ustaz ditahan pada 28 Februari 2002 dan dilepaskan pada keesokan harinya 1 Mac 2002.

A Setuju.


Hj.Ansari I object the question because parties are bound by their pleadings and at paragraph 9 of the statement of defence it was stated that this witness is produced before the Majistret Court on 29 Februari 2002 and ordered to be remanded for five days. It is not proper for my learned friend to depart from the pleadings by saying that this witness was released on 1st of Mac 2002 as the matter was never pleaded.


SFC The same objection was raised yesterday afternoon and I said it just a typing error, the date 29 Februari 2002 in paragraph 9 of Statement of Defence.


Hj.Ansari My learned friend misunderstood me. What is stated in paragraph 9 is that “the plaintiff was ordered to be remanded for 5 days”. Therefore it is not open to my learned friend to suggest to this witness that he was released on 1st Mac 2002 as that would be contrary to his own pleading which does not said that the plaintiff was released before the expiry of that 5 days remand. When this witness was released was never pleaded and the natural consequence of the words pleaded mean that the plaintiff was ordered to be remanded for 5 days and it was not stated when he was released. Since it was not so pleaded we say that it is now not open for the learned SFC to suggest that the release was on the 1st Mac 2002.


SFC My question is to the plaintiff during cross examination are based on his answer at page 21 line 4 and 7 and I also refer to page 20 line 39. The point is my question is whether he agreed he was held in the lock up on 28 Februari 2002 and was release on 1st Mac 2002.


Court In view of the objection and the based on the pleadings and submissions of both parties the question is allow but it would have to be rephrased to fit the situation.


Q Ustaz pada sessi soal utama petang semalam ustaz ada maksudkan telah dibebaskan atas permohonan polis. Bilakah tarikh ustaz dibebaskan berdasarkan maksud tersebut?

A Saya tidak ingat sudah.


SFC May I refer witness to P6B

(Shown to witness P6B)


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah tarikh dan jam dimana laporan polis tersebut dibuat merujuk P6B?

A Jam 1.20 2hb Mac 2002


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah semasa laporan polis ini disediakan oleh ustaz secara menaip adakah ustaz telah dibebaskan?

A Setelah keluar.


Q Adakah ustaz dimasukkan semula atau ditahan oleh polis dimana-mana lokap selepas laporan polis ini dibuat?

A Tidak ada.


SFC May I refer the plaintiff to the P6B 1st paragraph last 2 lines.

(Shown to witness P6B)


Q Sila ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah mengapa ustaz membuat report polis pada 2hb Mac 2002 dan mengatakan “saya telah digari dan kemudian dimasukkan ke dalam lokap sehingga 28 Mac 2002” setelah ustaz dibebaskan?

A Mental tidak berapa betul sudah. Tekanan tinggi, memori pun tidak berapa betul.


Q Sila maklum kepada mahkamah ustaz tidak pernah pada bila-bila masa membetulkan report polis ini?

A Kalau salah saya betulkan.


Q Adakah ustaz telah digari atau dimasukkan ke dalam lokap dari 28 Februari 2002 sehingga 28 Mac 2002 menurut laporan polis ini?

A Lokap saya ingat yang lain saya lupa.


Q Sila maklumkan kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz pernah membuat pertanyaan susulan samada laporan polis ini telah disiasat oleh PDRM?

A Menulis surat.


Q Boleh beritahu mahkamah bila surat tersebut ditulis?

A 16 Mei tahun 2002.


Q Sila maklumkan dokumen yang dirujuk oleh plaintiff semasa menyebut tarikh surat tersebut iaitu 16 Mei 2002 untuk tujuan rekod mahkamah.

A Exhibit P7 page 9 and 10.


Q Berdasarkan Exhibit P7 yang dimaksudkan oleh ustaz tadi, adakah ustaz catitkan nombor report atau tarikh report ustaz buat didalam mana-mana kenyataan surat tersebut?

A Nombor report tidak ada.

Q May I refer plaintiff to P7.

(witness shown P7)


Q Pada sessi soal utama pagi ini ustaz ada mengatakan telah menghantar surat didalam P7 kepada 4 orang Defendant dan ustaz juga telah mengesahkan bahawa tiada jawapan yang diperolehi dari empat penama tersebut. Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah apa jawapan yang ustaz perlukan selepas menghantar surat ini ?

A Jawapan kepada nama-nama yang ditujukan di atas agar ada 1 keterangan ataupun jawapan kepada saya sebagai rakyat yang menghargai undang-undang didalam negara yang tercinta ini berdasar hak asasi.


Q Adakah didalam surat tersebut iaitu dalam Exhibit P7, adakah ustaz meminta keempat-empat Defendant/Penama untuk menyiasat aduan ustaz seperti dalam laporan polis Exhibit P6A dan P6B.

A Tidak ada.


SFC Before we adjourned to tomorrow I have some statement. I would like to request the sitting of tomorrow untuk 12.00 noon as I have to rush back at my office at afternoon because I already take an afternoon flight.


Hj.Ansari The 1st witness is suffering from the acute diabetes where he will feel dizzy when the sugar level in his body is too high or too low. I would appreciate if we can finish off with this witness at least.


SFC I will need another 1 whole day

Court Adjourned to 10.00am tomorrow morning.



Signed by


YA SANGAU GUNTING

High Court Judge

9 Nov 2006 @ 5.15pm


10th November 2006

Court Resumes at 10.00 am

Parties as before.


SFC : Before we proceed with the cross examination I like to inform the court that we have taken the particulars and brief statement from two of the witnesses which has been raised by my learned counsel base on the notes of proceeding page 34, 35 and 36. I like to inform the court that I already informed my Senior Federal Counsel Tuan Kamaludin regarding this matter. My instructions is to inform the court that we are going to have further discussion regarding this matter when I going back to office later on. I also like to inform the court I already instructed Encik Asmara not to be present at the corridor of this High Court during this trial and he only can be present at the court after we call him as a witness. For court information some of the witnesses for the Defendants from the case 21-114-2002 I have advised them to be in the police lock up room downstair and for the Defendant in this case all are present at the court today except for Defendant 8.


Hj.Ansari : I would like to thank my learned friend for taking prompt action and I hope the incident will not be repeated.

Court Proceed

CONTINUATION CROSS EXAMINATION OF PW. 1
(Witness reminded he is still on oath)


Q Ustaz pada sessi soal utama pagi 9/11/2006 ustaz ada maklumkan ingat satu nama sahaja iaitu Abdul Muis bin Sulaiman. Siapakah Abdul Muis bin Sulaiman semasa membantu ustaz mengambil nama dan butiran peribadi mangsa-mangsa?

A Manusia/orang. Maksud kurang jelas.

Q Apakah peranan Abdul Muis bin Sulaiman ketika itu?

A Ikut-ikut bantu.


Q Semasa ustaz bersama-sama rakan-rakan membantu mengambil nama dan butiran peribadi mangsa-mangsa boleh beritahu mahkamah samada di luar masjid ataupun di dalam Masjid?

A Dalam pagar masjid.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah semasa ustaz ditahan oleh Defendant pertama dan juga seorang lagi anggota polis iaitu ustaz camkan sebagai Ahmad Kasim bin Atan (line 39, page 14 Notes of Evidence). Dimanakah ustaz ditahan ketika itu?

A Saya belum ditahan.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah sebelum kejadian iaitu 28/2/2002, adakah ustaz mengenali Defendant pertama iaitu ustaz namakan sebagai Rosli @ Tom di mana ustaz camkan di mahkamah ini (line 19 page 14 Notes of Proceeding)?

A Saya kenal.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah pada tarikh 28/2/2002, adakah ustaz tahu kehadiran Rosli @ Tom dan bersama-sama bersembahyang Zohor pada ketika itu?

A Sembahyang bersama saya, saya tidak nampak tetapi selepas Asar di beranda masjid dia duduk berdekatan dengan saya.


SFC May I refer plaintiff to Bundle DBD 1 page 10 Exhibit 6B

(shown to witness)

Q Ustaz didalam laporan polis tersebut ustaz katakana “pada lebih kurang jam lepas sembahyang zohor pada 28/2/2002 bertempat di Masjid Al Murahkabah di Kampung BDC Sandakan saya telah dibawa oleh beberapa orang yang saya tidak kenali nama mereka” Adakah ustaz maksudkan Rosli @Tom ataupun Ahmad Kassim bin Atan?

A Sewaktu laporan polis ini dibuat saya mengalami tekanan perasaan yang amat tinggi, kesihatan juga tidak berapa sempurna, mental juga kurang berkemampuan mengingati, jadi setelah itu pada hari ini di dalam mahkamah yang mulia penama yang dimaksudkan adalah Rosli atau nama glamournya Tom dan juga muka saya kenal tetapi nama yang disebutkan tadi itu Encik Ahmad Kassim.


Q Boleh beritahu mahkamah bila ustaz dibawa oleh Rosli @ Tom lepas sembahyang zohor atau selepas sembahyang asar?

A Saya ingat setelah lepas sembahyang Asar.


Q Pada tarikh 28/2/2002 boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah bagaimana ustaz pergi ke pejabat Special Branch di Batu 11/2 Jalan Buli Sim-Sim?

A Naik kereta dibawa oleh Rosli @ Tom.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah semasa ustaz dikatakan dibawa oleh Rosli @ Tom ustaz menaiki kereta polis atau kereta persendirian?

A Kereta persendirian.


Q Boleh ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah semasa ustaz di bawa ke pejabat Special Branch di Batu 11/2 Jalan Buli Sim-Sim adakah ustaz digari oleh Rosli @ Tom?

A Tidak.


Q Semasa ustaz di bawa oleh Rosli @ Tom pada 28/2/2002 ke pejabat Special Branch di Batu 11/2 Jalan Buli Sim-Sim, adakah ustaz diikuti oleh orang-orang ustaz ketika itu?

A Saya tidak tahu.


Q Semasa ustaz di bawa ke Balai Polis Special Branch di Batu 11/2 Jalan Buli Sim-Sim, adakah ustaz dimaklumkan kenapa kita dibawa ke pejabat tersebut oleh Rosli @ Tom?

A Ada. Bos mahu jumpa.


Q Ustaz pergi masjid Al Murahkabah dengan siapa pada 28/2/2002 sebelum dibawa oleh Special Branch?

A Saya sendiri yang lain saya tidak ingat.


Q Boleh maklum kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz dibawa oleh sesiapa ke masjid Al Murahkabah sebelum kejadian tersebut?

A Diri sendiri.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah kenderaan yang kita gunakan?

A Kereta Ninja.


Q Selepas ustaz dibebaskan dari lokap polis siapa yang ambil ustaz dari lokap polis?

A Isteri yang tercinta.


Q Semasa ustaz berada di pejabat Special Branch Jalan Buli Sim Sim adakah ustaz digari semasa disoal siasat oleh Sarjan Yaakub Defendant keempat?

A Tiada.


Q Boleh ustaz maklum kepada mahkamah berapa lama ustaz berada bersama sarjan Yakub di pejabat polis Special branch Jalan Buli Sim Sim pada 28/2/2002?

A Saya tidak ingat lama.

Q Selepas dari pejabat polis Special Branch Jalan Buli Sim-Sim, macam mana ustaz pergi ke Balai Polis Bandar, Sandakan?

A Menaiki kenderaan bersama Rosli @ Tom ke Balai Polis Bandar, Sandakan, bos mahu jumpa.


Q Semasa dibawa oleh Rosli @Tom ke balai Polis Bandar, Sandakan, adakah ustaz digari?

A Tidak ada.


Q Semasa sessi soal utama pada petang 8/11/2006 (line 7, page 17 Notes of Proceeding) ustaz ada maklumkan setibanya di balai Polis Bandar Sandakan ustaz duduk sahaja di kerusi. Sila maklum kepada mahkamah bahagian mana ustaz duduk di Balai Polis Bandar Sandakan?

A Kalau ada gambar saya boleh tunjuk. Cuma bayangan, kerusi di Balai yang ada kaunter.


Q Adakah ustaz berada diluar kaunter ketika itu?

A Saya pun tidak tahu istilah kaunter di balai tetapi macam tempat bertanya.


Q Ustaz ada pergi membuat laporan polis di balai Polis Sandakan pada 2/3/2002.

A Ada.


Q Adakah kaunter di mana ustaz serahkan laporan polis tersebut sama dengan kaunter yang ustaz maksudkan ketika berada di balai Polis pada 28/2/2002?

A Sama.


Q Pada sessi soal utama 8/11/2006 sessi petang (line 11, page 17 Notes of Proceeding) ustaz ada katakan seorang pegawai keselamatan keluar dan menyatakan kepada saya, saya ditahan. Siapakah yang ustaz maksudkan pegawai keselamatan tersebut?

A Inspektor Majari.


Q Semasa Inspektor Majari memaklumkan ustaz ditahan adakah ustaz bersama dengan orang lain ketika itu?

A Tidak ada.


Q Adakah Rosli @ Tom ataupun Ahmad Kasim menyerahkan ustaz kepada Inspektor Majari pada ketika itu?

A Saya duduk di kerusi.


Q Semasa ustaz duduk di kerusi adakah ustaz digari?

A Tidak ada.


Q Bolehkah ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz diberitahu oleh Inspektor Majari mengenai kesalahan ustaz sebelum ditahan?

A Tahan dia masuk lokap.


Q Soalan saya adalah bolehkah ustaz maklumkan kepada mahkamah adakah ustaz diberitahu oleh Inspektor Majari mengenai kesalahan ustaz sebelum ditahan?

A Tidak ada.


SFC I will like to refer plaintiff to BP2 paragraph 15 of the Statement of Claim.

( Witness shown, and BP2 paragraph 15 of the statement of claim interpreted to witness)

Q Tadi semasa disoal oleh saya ustaz katakan kepada mahkamah Defendant keenam iaitu Inspektor Majari pada ketika itu tidak memberitahu kenapa ustaz ditahan. Mengapa di dalam paragraph 15, penyataan tuntutan ustaz yang difailkan sendiri oleh ustaz (BP2) ustaz mengatakan didalam barisan kedua “ordered to be put into the police lock up by the 6th Defendant who told him that he being detained for incitement under the Seditious Act”?

A Saya ingin jelaskan sendiri apa yang berlaku kepada saya sebab saya masih hidup di dalam mahkamah.


Q Sila maklum kepada mahkamah samada ustaz telah diberitahu oleh Inspektor Majari kenapa ustaz ditahan?

A Tidak ada. “ Tahan dia masuk lokap”


Q Boleh beritahu Mahkamah mana satu penyataan ustaz yang betul iaitu ustaz tidak pernah dimaklum kenapa ditahan ataupun ustaz telah dimaklum kenapa ditahan berdasarkan paragraph 15, penyataan tuntutan (BP2)?

A Tidak diberitahu apa sebab “tahan dia masuk lokap”.


Q Adakah ustaz katakan penyataan di dalam baris 2 dan 3 perenggan 15, (BP2) penyataan tuntutan yang difailkan oleh ustaz iaitu (6th Defendant who told him that he being detained for incitement under the Seditious Act” adalah tidak benar?

A Soalan tidak jelas.


Q Saya ulang balik. Adakah ustaz katakan penyataan di dalam baris 2 dan 3 perenggan 15, (BP2) penyataan tuntutan yang difailkan oleh ustaz iaitu (6th Defendant who told him that he being detained for incitement under the Seditious Act” adalah tidak benar?

A Kenyataan benar yang saya sebutkan di dalam Mahkamah.

SFC May I refer plaintiff to BP2 paragraph 14.

(witness shown and BP2 paragraph 14 interpreted to witness)


Q Tadi semasa saya soal balas ustaz “Selepas dari pejabat polis Special Branch Jalan Buli Sim-Sim, macam mana ustaz pergi ke Balai Polis Bandar, Sandakan” jawapan ustaz “Menaiki kenderaan bersama Rosli @ Tom ke Balai Polis Bandar, Sandakan ‘bos mahu jumpa’”. Soalan saya merujuk kepada para 14, penyataan tuntutan yang difailkan oleh ustaz (BP2) barisan 2 dan 3, “The plaintiff was informed that the 5th Defendant wanted to see him” . Mengapa didalam Mahkamah ini ustaz mengatakan Rosli @ Tom maklumkan bos mahu jumpa tetapi dalam paragraph 14, penyataan tuntutan (BP2) barisan 2 dan 3 ustaz mengatakan dimaklumkan Defendant kelima hendak jumpa?

A Sebab saya tidak berapa tahu berapa banyak bos di balai Polis Sandakan.


Q Adakah penyataan ustaz di paragraph 14 barisan 2 dan 3 (BP2) tidak betul kerana bercanggah dengan penyataan ustaz semasa soal balas?


Hj.Ansari Is it the case for the Defendant that the 5th Defendant Chief Inspektor Yusof bin Othman is not the Boss of Defendant 1 and Defendant 2.


Q Semasa Rosli @Tom berkata kepada ustaz “Bos mahu jumpa” sebelum ke balai Polis Bandar Sandakan adakah ustaz tahu Defendant kelima Inspektor Yusof yang dimaksudkan?

A Saya tidak berapa tahu berapa banyak bos di Balai Polis.


Q Saya ulang balik soalan semasa Rosli @Tom berkata kepada ustaz “Bos mahu jumpa” sebelum ke balai Polis Bandar Sandakan adakah ustaz tahu Defendant kelima Inspektor Yusof yang dimaksudkan?


A Tidak tahu siapa bos.


SFC I ask for another date.

I request two of my Defendants that is ACP Suhaimi Hj.Mohd Ali 7th Defendant and Sarjan Yakub 4th Defendant who are retired police personnel to be excuse to come for the continue hearing on January 2007.

Hj.Ansari The second witness En Hassnar Ebrahim will have to identify the 7th Defendant and his testimony include certain facts against the same Defendant . I have no objection for 7th Defendant to be excused but the learned SFC should not later apply to adjourn the matter in order to get instruction from the 7th Defendant . As for the 4th Defendant I have no objection.

SFC Undertake to ensure no adjournment taken because of taking instruction from the 7th Defendant.

Hj.Ansari We will be calling not more than 50 witnessess for both suits.


Court For continue hearing to 8 – 10 January 2007 at 10.00 am.



SIGNED BY


YA SANGAU GUNTING

HIGH COURT JUDGE

10/11/2006 @ 11.50 am


20th November 2008 @ 10.00 a.m.


Continuation of trial.

Parties as before

PW1 reaffirmed.

Continuation of cross-examination of PW1
Q1 After you were released by the police, did you at any time make a personal complaint against the police especially the 5th to 7th defendants?
A Yes.
Q2 What complaints did you make?
A My answer to Question 1 should be “No”, but I had made complaint against the police.
Q3 Refer to Police Report P6, in your previous statement at this Court you said you made this police report P6, is it correct?

A Yes.

Q4 After you make this police report, did anybody from the police department call you or take your statement in regards the complaint you make in this police report?

A None.

Q5 Did you refer to Bukit Aman in regards that no police personnel investigate your police complaint?

A I cannot remember.

Q6 After you were released from the police station, did you still help the people in BDC?

A Yes. I still helping them.

XXN PW1
Q7 Can you inform to the Court, were you at the kampong BDC when you said you were helping them?

A I was helping them from the mosque near the BDC.

Q8 Do you agree with me that you had stopped helping these people after you were released by the police?

A I disagree.

Q9 Do you agree with me that when the police released you on 1st March 2002, you never made any complaint against the police at that time?

A Yes.

Q10 When you were brought to the Magistrate for remand, you were represented by your lawyer?

A Yes,

Q11 Who was the lawyer who represented you at that time?

A Razak Hj Jamil from Messrs Razak & Alimin, Kota Kinabalu.

Q12 Did at any time when you appeared before the Magistrate for your remand, did you inform the Magistrate about your sickness?

A I cannot remember but the police knew because I brought my insulin with me.
Q13 After you were released by the police, did you go to any clinic or specialist for further medical check up regarding your sickness that you said you suffered during the detention?

A I did not see any doctor because I felt so embarrassed because of my detention.


XXN PW1

[Witness asks for permission to drink water to control his sugar level]

Q14 Can you inform the Court did you at any time go for medical check up for the sickness that you pleaded in your statement of claim at paragraph 28(b) and (c)?

A I had gone for medical check up by the specialist but I cannot remember when.

Q15 Can you give us the time frame of your visit to the specialist after the release?
A I cannot remember because it was long ago.

Q16 Can you remember what is your business at the time of your detention and release?

A Syarie Consultant.

Q17 What is your major business?

A Marriage, divorce, polygamy and etc.

Q18 Can you inform the Court what was your income per day based on this business at that material time?

A Around RM1,000 to RM2,000 per day.

Q19 Can you inform whether this was the only business you had at that material time?

A I had many jobs at that time such as direct selling, selling insurance and by being a politician.

Q20 Refer to his statement of claim at paragraph 28 (d). Do you have now the proof that because of the deprivation of opportunity in carrying out your business you had suffered loss of RM500,000.00 as pleaded in your statement of claim?

XXN PW1
A Yes.

Q21 Based on your answer “Yes”. What proof do you have?

A I cannot prove it because my car “Ninja SS3030 J” was seized because I could not pay the installment and my wife nearly run away.

Q22 Do you agree with me that until now you cannot prove that you have suffered the loss of RM500,000.00 due to loss of business opportunity?

A I disagree.

Q23 Refer to paragraph 28 (b) of your statement of claim. Do you agree with me that you cannot produce any specialist report or receipt to show that you suffered more from the gout for which you are claiming RM500,000.00?

A I pray for permission to consult with my lawyer. For my gout sickness I cannot prove to the Court but for my diabetes I can prove it.

Q24 What is your answer to my Question 23?

A I cannot answer.

Q25 Refer to paragraph 28 ( c ) of your Statement of Claim. Do you agree with me that you cannot produce any specialist report or receipt to show that you develop or suffer gastric as pleaded there?

A No

XXN PW1
Q26 Can you inform the Court after you were brought back to Sandakan Bandar police station from the Magistrates’ court, how long you were placed in the police lock up before the release?

A I was released in the evening on the same day.

Q27 Do you know what time in the evening?

A After the Asar prayer

Q28 Refer to your statement of claim paragraph 28 ( c ). Did you lodge any police complaint that you were tortured by the police during your detention?

A I cannot remember.

Q29 Do you agree with me that there was no police officer or personnel tortured you during your detention at Police lock up?

A I disagree.

Q30 Do you know the police personnel who tortured you?

A What I meant by “torturing” is the feeling I felt when I was detained.

No further Question.


Re-Examination of PW1:

Q31 Can you inform the Court why did you insist that the villagers at BDC have legal rights to be there when you were cross-examined at page 31 lines 24 onward until lines 1-30 of page 32 by the learned SFC on the fact that you cannot produce the land titles to support their rights to be there?

Re PW1

A Because at that time the senior leader for the Sungai Community Datuk Pangiran Galpam had brought the Sungai people to move and stay in the town area so they can enjoy the basic facilities such as education. Because of the Sungai People are from poor community, so Datuk Pangiran Galpam gave this place now called BDC to them for them to build their house and live there together with other communities like Suluk, Bajau, Bugis, Banjar, Dusun and some from West Malaysia.

Q32 At page 41 you were asked whether you saw the demolition exercise and your answer was “No”. Why do you state in your statement of claim that the houses were demolished when you did not actually see the demolition?

A After the demolition had been done the houses are no longer there, you can see today there is nothing left.

Q33 You were asked at page 62 whether you had any document to prove that you had seen specialist for your health problem after you were released. Can you inform the Court whether you did for a fact saw a specialist and whether it was a private or government doctor?

A Yes. I did see the specialist at the government hospital.

Q34 You mentioned at page 63 that you can substantiate your diabetic problem but not gout. Did you seek treatment for these two problems in the government or private clinic?

A Both the government and private clinic.

Re PW1
Q35 It was put to you at page 64 by the learned SFC that nobody tortured you while you were under detention by the police and you disagreed. Why do you maintain that you were tortured while under detention?

A When I was being investigated I was not beaten up , but when I was put inside the lock up I was tortured mentally and emotionally because at that time I was a professional Ustaz and respected by the Muslim community.

No further Question.

Court:

Witness released.

Adjourned to 2.00 p.m.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie

20th November 2008 @ 12.10 a.m.



Court Resumes at 2.00 p.m.

Parties as before

PW2 Asainar @ Hassnar B Hj MP Ebrahim
NRIC No: 520311-12-5345

58 years old.

Businessman,

Director of Ladang Zahara Maju Sdn Bhd.

E25, Lorong Pecky Valley 1, Taman Pecky Valley

Mile 2 Sandakan.

(Affirms and states in English)

Examination-In-Chief of PW2

Q36 Can you inform the Court what is your educational qualification?

A I completed senior Cambridge and continued my further studies in Civil Engineering until the third year when I was asked to go on leave from the college in 1974 because at that particular time there was a big demonstration and the government decided to close all universities and colleges between December 1974 until March 1975.

Q37 Did you hold any government position prior to February 2002?

A Yes. Mostly through political appointment whereby I was appointed as Director of statutory bodies or as councilor of Sandakan Town Board and later Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan. I also hold the post of Pemimpin Kemajuan Rakyat for two election constituency as representative of the elected Wakil Rakyat and the last post I held was as the District Chief of Sandakan.

Q38 What are the main responsibilities of the District Chief?

A Its depends on ones knowledge about the post of the District chief. During the colonial time the District Chief is addressed as OKK or the Orang Kaya Kaya of the District who represent the native communities in the British Administration. After the independence, a lot of the job that were assigned to the District Chief were taken over by various agency but a lot was still in the hands of the District Chief but never carried out.

Q39 Where were you born?

A Jalan 1, Sandakan.

Q40 What is your ethnic background as a native of Sabah?

A My mother is a Sungai.

Q41 Where were you brought up?

A Kampong Berhala Darat Sandakan and Kampong Perpaduan which later was known as kampong BDC.

Q42 When was the first time that you stayed at kampong BDC?

A In 1965 or 1966.

Q43 How long did you stayed at that Kampong?

A I learned to read the Quran and do my prayers from Imam Yusof bin Karim who resided at Kampong Perpaduan. As his pupils I used to stay in the Imam's house on and of basis.

Q44 For how long?

A I can’t exactly tell length of time I stayed in this kampong but I can only say from 1966 till 1979 when I got married to my wife at Kampong BDC. It was always on the basis of on and of between a week or several months.

Q45 Since 1966 until 2002 did the government demolish any of the houses at Kampong BDC?

A Partly yes but through proper procedure.

Q46 What was the basis of the demolition that you know was used by the government?

PW2
A I was involved in the government negotiation with several natives who were residing at the place which is now part of the Buli Sim Sim Road which start from the traffic light right in front of the present hospital to the junction at Rumah Kastam which is adjacent to Chi Hwa Kindergarten. Most of the people who put up houses in this area were given proper notice and paid compensation by the government to move elsewhere to enable the construction of the Buli Sim Sim road.

Q47 What was your position at that time?

A I was one of the Sandakan Townboard councilor.

Q48 To your knowledge, what assistance have been given by the government to Kampong BDC?

A From 1975 the then USNO Government give financial assistance for the native communities who took residence at Kampong Perpaduan by way of providing grant to built wet market, cat walk, jambatan, public toilets, surau (prayer house). Then when the road from the hospital junction right to the low cost housing at Kampong Berhala Darat was constructed, all those natives who were asked to move to relocate. Apart from financial assistance from the government the Sandakan Townboard also assist them by providing transport to move all the housing materials that were taken down.

Q49 What amenities or services that were provided by the government to Kampong BDC?

PW2
A From what I witnessed commencing 1975 the government firstly asked the people to register the houses that they built. Each house was given a number which start with LBS followed by the number of the house and then the year. With the registration each house owner was allowed to apply for water supply, electricity, telephone and even loan under the government scheme called “Takun” to open up small businesses in the kampong or in the market that was built for the convenience of the natives residing there. As the number of people increases the government even improved this services by erecting telephone post and lines and electricity post made of iron so as to enable even those houses in the remote area of kampong BDC can benefit from the government amenities.
Q50 Prior to 2002 did you have any problem with the Royal Malaysian Police?
A In other area, yes. I have even instituted legal action against several officers from Beluran Police station for their inaction, omission and for their refusal to take any action against theft of my property, attempt to rob me of my property through usage of fraudulent document and cheat, especially when I refused to submit to their request for financial assistance.

Q51 What do you know about OPS Nyah that was launched in late 2001 or early 2002?

A I was not in the state of Sabah when the operation was started by the Police. I came to know about the matter towards the end of February while I was in Johore and early March when I was in Singapore attending a business conference. I was only informed about the demolition exercise carried out by the Police by relatives through telephone. It was only after I came back home in March after my arrest by the so called police that I learnt OPS Nyah II was designed by the government as a program to rid the state of illegal immigrants. There was nothing in the government intended program at any time to involve the destruction of any natives houses. The Defendants have exceeded their authority.

Q52 Can you inform the Court what transpired in relation to Encik ` Dali (PW1) on 28th February 2002 when you were overseas?

A At that particular time I was in Singapore and when informed of the demolition exercise and the arrest of my saudara Dali, I strongly advice him to lodge a police report as from my personal experience during the Berjaya Government, kampong BDC is eligible to be gazette as a native reserve in view of the native who resided there were asked by their respective leaders to move from their kampong and live in the town. To my knowledge there is ample law in this country that allow native to get customary rights after they have reside in a particular area that has not been alienated. To me my advice to Dali was on the ground of illegality conducted by the Defendant.

PW2
Q53 Who was the person who informed you about the arrest of Dali (PW1)?

A On that particular day I received almost 30 calls, I can’t exactly tell who told me the earliest about PW1 arrest but I did later spoke to him personally and advice him to lodge the police report and engage a lawyer to institute legal action the Defendant.

Q54 Can you give any names besides Encik Dali who called you for advice during that time?

A Sharifah Eman, Oden Omar, Karama Sajai, Hj Montoi Sahih and Rajiman.

Q55 When did you come back to Sandakan?

A 18th of March 2002

Q56 What happen when you came back?

A I was sick at that time. After reaching home and placing all my begs I went to Dr Tay’s clinic which happen to be at BDC which was a stone throw away from kampong BDC. After getting my medication for my gout, I went to the place which was very well known to me as Jambatan C. All the houses there were demolish. There were hundreds of police personnel armed to their teeth. Apart from that there were also 4 to 5 excavators of various models doing their job demolishing houses. The kampong were like war zone. On seeing me, hundreds of the victims, some crying asking for help.

Q57 What happened next?

PW2
A As I was sick and could hardly move because of my gout, I only told those victims go make police report and engage a lawyer and I went back home.

Q58 Did anybody come to your house on that day?

A Yes. Some even stayed until the odd hours on the next day.

Q59 Why did they go to see you in your house?

A They asked me for assistance as they said I was the Ketua Daerah of Sandakan who knows this matters pertaining to natives affairs that was supposed to be protected by the Defendants.

Q60 Did you help them?

A I repeatedly advised them to lodge a police report and engage a lawyer because what the Defendants did can only be determine by the Court of law.

Q61 What happened on the next day after your arrival?

A As I can’t stand the influx of victims coming to see me, I decided to meet them at a corner shop nearest to the demolish houses where a few of the victims children who were on holiday and had basic knowledge about computers to assist the victims in lodging the police report. I do not know their names of all those university student who came to that shop with their computer. What they did was to type a police report for each individual victim and to print them out so as to enable the victims to go to the police station and to paste the report without having to write the report personally on the Police form “Pol 55”. About 50 of them were holding the

PW 2

reports made available with the assistance of these students. I then told them to go to the police station to lodge the report themselves. I later followed them to the police station with the intention to ensure the police report that has been prepared are properly registered.

Q62 Refer PBD1 pages 1 – 3. What are these documents?

A These are only a few of the police report that has been prepared by the children of the victims who came back home to witness the demolition of their houses by the Defendant. I have asked the victims to individually applied for a certified copy of these police report but I was told by the police personnel attending the desk where copies of police report were collected, he said “Encik, OCPD tidak benarkan”. So although we had paid for a copy of police report to date we have not receive any as the OCPD refused to sign or to give a signed copy of the police report.

Q63 Are you the author of these documents?

A I couldn’t remember. They were typed using computers owned by the children of the victims and printed using their printer. They are university students who I presumed knows better than me.

Q64 Did you during this period go to Balai Polis Sandakan?

A Yes.

Q65 Can you remember the date?
A That was on 22nd March 2002.

PW2
Q66 What happened when you went to Balai Polis Sandakan on that day?

A On my arrival at the Balai Polis, I was made to understand between 10 to 15 victims has already lodged a report prior to my arrival. As there were about 50 victims who are yet to make their report I went to the charge room where there were two male police personnel manning the desk.

As I entered an Inspector who was later made known to me by the name of Inspector Majari came down from the 1st Floor and shouted at the victims who were there to make their report. In an uncivilized manner this Inspector Majari rudely ordered the victims to line up. In a harsh and loud voice he said “kamu, kamu, kamu berbaris, berbaris”

I then politely tried to inform him that these peoples has their legal rights under the constitution of Malaysia to lodge police report and take the necessary legal action in any Court of law in Malaysia. Instead the same Inspector Majari in a Babaric manner pointed his finger towards my face and said “kamu ditahan”. I asked “apa kesalahan saya”. He said “jangan cakap banyak, kamu masuk”. At the same time he instructed two officers who were inside a gated room beside the charge room “tahan ini orang”.

As I was in a police station and as I was aware the barbaric mood of the police cannot be confronted with logic, I obliged and stayed in the cell for no legal reason until Inspector Yusof Osman asked the Magistrate Court to

PW2

release me on the ground that he was instructed by his superior to get a Court order for my release from the Sandakan Police lock up.


Court:

Short break.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie

20th November 2008 @ 3.20 p.m.


Court Resumes at 3.40 p.m.

Parties as before

(Witness reminded he is still under oath).

Continuation of Examination-In-Chief of PW2

Q67 You mentioned Inspector Majari and Inspector Yusof bin Othman. Can you identify these two police personnel?

A Yes. (The witness pointed to the two said police personnel who are sitting in the public gallery)

Q68 What else happened on the day of your arrest 22nd March 2002?

A After Inspector Majari instructed the police personnel in the gated room, I was asked to take off my clothing and together with my other belongings I gave them for safekeeping and from the gated room I was then taken to a very, very dirty cell which had three compartments or room divided only by approximately one inch size iron bars with an open toilet that

PW2
has no doors but water flowing out continuously none stop throughout my stay in the lock up.

Q69 Can you identify any of the police personnel that were at the police station on that day beside the two officers that you have identified?

A Yes.

Q70 Any of them in Court today?

A One of them, I can’t remember his name, is sitting in the public gallery near to the switch.

[The police personnel identifies himself as Lans Koperal 141461 Haris Bin Dahri]

Mr Ansari:

For the purpose of the record, he is the 5th defendant.

Q71 Were you informed of the ground of your arrest?

A Not exactly although I did ask. It was only when I was about to enter the room where I handed over my belongings and clothing that Inspector Majari in passing said “kau ditahan menghasut” something like that.

Q72 Were you given any food and drinks on the night of 22nd March 2002?

A Not that provided by the lock up personnel as on my entry to the cell they informed me there will be no foods as it’s only provided for detainee who came in during the day. My food were brought by my wife.

Q73 What happened on the next morning 23rd March 2002?

A After having my breakfast, brought by my wife, I was handcuffed and taken out from the cell with only my trousers. I was paraded from the Balai Polis where the lock up was located to another building which is about a hundred meters away from the building where the lock up is.

I was left in a small room with chief inspector Yusof Othman where we have a long chat. No statement was taken but from about 9.00 a.m. in the morning until about 11.30 or 12.00, chief inspector Yusof Othman only query me about my family backgrounds, my wife, my children, total acreage of land that I owned, monthly income, and so forth.

There was never at any point of time throughout that meeting I was ask about what happened that led to my arrest and detention or anything about police charges against me. The last thing I was told by the same chief inspector Mohd Yusof was why I wanted to get involved and why not just go back to Kuala Lumpur. We will forget about the whole matter. Throughout this meeting I was handcuffed.

Q74 Were you produced before the Magistrate and if so, when?

A On the next morning of my arrest, I was brought before a magistrate in the old building of the Sandakan administrative office. There was no Magistrate but only a registrar was available.

Q75 What happened when you were brought to see the registrar?

A As I was not feeling well, I told my wife to engage a lawyer to come to fight for my case against any application for remand should there be any.

PW2

As I anticipated the Defendant brought me to the Magistrate and when they told me that they are going to apply for remand, I did told the personnel who brought me to the registrar’s office that I have engaged a lawyer who is coming by the first flight from Kota Kinabalu. I regret my plea was never given any attention and instead I was forcefully with my handcuffed brought before the registrar where the Defendant applied for a 14 days remand.

As my lawyer was not around, I told the registrar that I am a businessman with a proper registered address in Sandakan, in Kota Kinabalu and in Kuala Lumpur and that I can be easily be contacted as and whenever I am required to attend to any investigation if called for by the police. I told the registrar that the application by the police for a 14 days remand was for purpose of hiding their illegal activities and denying me from exposing their misconduct and crime towards the natives of Sabah.

Upon hearing my objection the registrar granted a one day remand. It was a Saturday and my one day lasted until Monday on the 26th.

Q76 What was the reasons given by Inspector Yusof to the registrar in support of his application for two weeks remand?

A None. His argument was the application was to enable the police to make further investigation. I believe it was on this ground the registrar was reluctant to grant the order.

PW2
Q77 After the order for remand of one day, were you questioned on the purported charge of sedition by the police?

A None. It was only after the lengthy meeting with Chief Inspector Yusof Othman at the other building, I was later brought to see another police officer on the first floor of the same building where the lock up is located. I do not know him personally by name but from queries I forwarded to the Ketua Balai he is Chief Inspector Chong Ah Chai. This Inspector Chong Ah Chai only took my statement with regards to what happen from the day I came back to Sandakan until I was detained. There was nothing mentioned to me about any charges or crimes that I had committed towards the state.

Q78 Is Chief Inspector Chong Ah Chai in Court today?

A Yes. (The witness pointed to the gentlemen with police uniform sitting at the public gallery. The said gentleman identifies himself as Acting ASP Chong Ah Chai).

Q79 Do you know the fourth Defendant in this case, Suhaimi Hj Mohd Ali?

A Not before my arrest. I learned about him only after I was put in the lock up for any logical reasons.

Q80 Are you able to identify the fourth Defendant?

A Yes. (The witness pointed to the gentleman with the suit sitting in the public gallery. The gentleman identifies himself as retired OCPD of Sandakan Suhaimi Hj Mohd Ali).

PW2
Q81 Can you identify any other Defendant that is present today in the Court?

A Yes. He is the seventh Defendant whom I was informed holding the post of Lans Koperal 118361 Satar Bin Semangot. He is the gentleman sitting at the back of the court. (The gentlemen identifies himself as Lance Corporal Sattar Bin Semangot)

Hj Ansari:

The learned SFC have indicated to the Court and to me that the case had been taken over by SFC Encik Steve Ritikos who is presently attending the PTK course. Encik Iznan is supposed to handle only the first witness while the rest will be dealt with by Encik Steve. I therefore apply the matter to be adjourned to a date in February next year since my client will be arranging for his daughters education in England in January next year.

SFC:

I confirm what my learned friend said to the Court.

Mr Ansari:

I confined myself mainly on the evidence on the officers who are present in court so that they can be released from attending the court after they have been identified. I will prepare a witness statement for the remainder of the testimony of PW2 and all the other civilian witnesses for the next sitting.

PW2:

At the moment I am planning to leave for England on 12th December 2008. I won’t be around on 6th January 2009.

Court: To February 2-6, 2009 at 10 a.m. for continuation of hearing.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie

20th November 2008 @ 4.40 p.m.























PW2

2nd February 2009 @ 10.15 a.m.

Continuation of trial.

For Plaintiff: Tn Haji Ansari Abdullah assisted by

Encik Mohd Shariff Abdullah

For Defendants: SFC Encik Steve Ritikos

Mr Ansari:

There was a third bundle of documents filed by the plaintiff on 8 November 2006 together with a book and four VCD. May I apply for the bundle to be marked as plaintiff’s bundle PBD3.


Court:

Plaintiff’s Bundle of Documents dated 8th November 2006 -

PBD3

Four VCD: PBD4 (a-d)

The book “Keadilan untuk Sabah”: PBD5

Mr Ansari:

I would like to inform the Court that the plaintiff is not able to file or tender witness statements for PW2 as he has not been well for the past one month as he has problem with his right ear which is affecting his hearing and balance. He will continue with his evidence orally.






PW2

PW2 re-affirmed and states in English
Continuation of Examination-In-Chief of PW2
Q82 Before we adjourned on 20th November 2008, you were telling the Court about what happened until your statement was taken by Chief Inspector Chong. Can you relate to the Court what transpired after your statement was taken by Chief Inspector Chong?


A After my statement taken by Chief Inspector Chong, I was also taken out from my cell on Sunday morning at about 9.00 or after 9.00 a.m to the next building where at the front door was stated Pejabat Jabatan Siasatan Jenayah. I was taken to a corner room where Chief Inspector Yusof at his office. I do not know exactly how to term what transpired because all through out the time I spent in the room with Chief Inspector Yusof Osman, the questions forwarded to me by C/Inspector were related to my education, number of people in my family, land that I owned, income I derived from my business, the whereabouts of my family members in Malaysia, in UK, and the Middle East. Amongst other, how many wives I have was also raised. There was never at any time throughout my stay in that room with my handcuff I was asked about the crime I committed resulting in myself being detained in the lock-up. Throughout there were only talks and laughter which to me was intended to humiliate me as a human being. I said so

PW2

when the Chief Inspector laughed at me and said “wah, you have so much property, you had good income, cuma satu binikah?” I told him, “one wife cukuplah”. Then, there was a suggestion from the Chief Inspector that why not I leave Sabah and go back to Kuala Lumpur and to forget about the whole matter. I said, “No. You can detain me for as long as you like because I know what you did to the people of Sabah especially the natives has no legal basis, wrong in law, and against the teaching of my religion.”


Q83 How long did the 2nd Defendant question you on Sunday 24th March 2002?

A Until after the Azan Johor prayer was heard. That’s about 12.30 to 1.00 p.m.

Q84 From the morning until the completion of the questioning by the 2nd Defendant were you given any food or allowed to take your medicine?

A No.

Q85 Did you ask for food and drinks or the opportunity to take your medication from the 2nd Defendant?

A I only asked for the handcuff to be removed because 1) it was too tight and 2), it was a short handcuff which hurts my shoulder joints adding further inconvenience to me as I was having my gout at that time.

Q86 What happened after the 2nd Defendant released you from his room?

PW2
A I was taken back under escort to the same lock-up I spent before I was taken out for that Sunday special meeting.

Q87 In the afternoon until the evening of Sunday 24th March 2002, did the police question you further?

A No.

Q88 From the afternoon until the evening of that day, were you given any food, drinks or medication for your gout problem?

A The food I took was supplied by my wife and yes, I did get my medication from the several cell attendants.

Q89 What transpired on the next day Monday 25th March 2002?

A I was taken out from the cell before 8.30 a.m. Asked to put on my clothes and then again I was handcuffed using the same short handcuff. From the Balai Polis I was paraded under escort by several police personnel in uniform to the old Sandakan administrative building where the Court was moved to. The old Court house was under renovation at that time. The place where I was paraded was right in front of the Majlis Perbandaran building where hundreds of people were witnessing at that time.

When we reach the Court house my counsel tried to get instruction from me but the Chief Inspector who happens to be the prosecuting officer told off my counsel not to come near me. My counsel at that time was Mr Ansari himself. I believe Mr Ansari has raised the incidents when I was



PW2

brought before the Magistrate and everything that transpired that particular morning was requested by the counsel to be written by the magistrate.

At the magistrate’s Court instead of my counsel asking for my release, it was the chief inspector Yusof bin Osman who asked the Magistrate for an order to release me. There was an argument between the magistrate and the prosecuting officer at that time which is something like this: The magistrate said “kamu yang tangkap, patut kalau mahu lepas kamu lepas lah.” Chief Inspector Yusof Osman said “ tidak, tidak tuan. Saya diberi arahan supaya mendapatkan order dari Mahkamah ini supaya membebaskan tahanan ini.”

Before I engaged counsel to conduct this trial, I did ask the Pendaftar Mahkamah Magistrate Sandakan for a copy of the Notes of Proceedings of my released but was rejected. I believe counsel has subpoena the notes to be tendered in this trial.

Q90 What time were you released from Police custody on 25th March 2002?

A The time of my released is as stated in my 1st Police report on that same day.

Q91 From the date of your release 25th March 2002 until today, have you ever being charged in Court for any offence related to your arrest by the Police on 22nd March 2002?

A Never.

PW2
Q92 Refer the witness to page 4 of PBD1. Can you inform the Court what is this document?

A This is the Police bail which was issued by Chief Inspector Yusof Osman which I believe was issued to save their face.

Q93 Did the police at any time release you from this police bail since 25th March 2002?

A I did ask several time about this but was told “biarkanlah” or “tak tahu lah”. So the status of this bail is unknown to me since that is almost eight years now.

Mr Ansari:

Apply for this document be marked together with the police bail and police report at pages 5, 6 and 7.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection.

Court:

Police bail: P8

Police report no. 3118/2002: P9

Police report no. 3119/2002: P10

Police report no. 3120/2002: P11

Q94 What happen on the next day 26th March 2002?

A Actually, immediately after I lodged my three police reports i.e. P9, P10, P11 the Defendant stopped all the demolition exercise throughout the State of Sabah. From time of my release not only until the 26th but for about a month onwards the natives managed to experience relief from the uncivilized act of the Defendant.

PW2
Q95 Did any of the Defendants made any statement to the media about your arrest?

A Yes, the 4th Defendant especially.

Q96 Refer to PBD 1 at page 32. Was this the statement that was mentioned by you earlier?

A Yes.

Q97 Why do you say so?

A Firstly, there was only one BDC in Sandakan. Then there was only one former politician arrested pertaining to matters relating to the native affairs in kg BDC and that person” the man in his 50s” is referring to me and the person arrested on that Friday afternoon accused of instigating is none other then me.

Mr Ansari:

Apply for this document to be marked.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection if it is only to show that there is such a statement published in the newspaper.

Court:

The newspaper cutting in Borneo Mail dated 26/3/2002: P12

Q98 Refer to page 33 of PBD1, is this one of the statement made by 4th Defendant as testified by you earlier?

A Yes.

Q99 Why do you say this statement is related to you?

PW2
A Firstly, I know the journalist who wrote this piece of news. In page 33 of PBD1 is just a translation from the English version into Bahasa Malaysia of page 32 PBD1. The contents of the report are the same.

Mr Ansari:

Apply for this document to be marked as exhibit.

Mr Ritikos:

The witness said this is just the translation from the English version. The answer is very vague.

A Both reports were written by the same journalist, Encik Yusof bin Teppo, a reporter working for Borneo Post. The first report in English appeared on the 26th March 2002. The same report was carried by the same newspaper in Bahasa Malaysia on the next day. The contents of both on page 32 and 33 are the same and they are newspaper cutting from Borneo Mail which is also “Utusan Borneo in Malay translation.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection without admission to the truth of contents.

Court:

Newspaper cutting from Utusan Borneo dated 27/3/2002: P13



PW2
Q100 According to second paragraph of P13 you were arrested at the scene or site of the squatters “ditahan di kawasan setinggan berkenaan”. Is this correct?
A It’s a lie.

Q101 In the fourth paragraph of P13 the 4th Defendant said that you would be charged under the Sedition Act. Is this correct
A Until today I had never heard of or received any document whatsoever from any of the Defendant of their intention to proceed with their intention to prosecute me under any law of the land relating to my arrest.

Q102 You were alleged by the 4th Defendant to have disturbed the demolition exercise “selepas menggangu kerja-kerja meroboh rumah setinggan” in the 1st paragraph of P13. Did you do anything to physically stop the demolition exercise?
A Never. I only brought the natives of Sabah who had been made victim by Police from Semenanjung to lodge police report which resulted in me being arrested.

Q103 Did the 4th Defendant Suhaimi Hj Mohd Ali ever issue a denial or correction of his statements in P12 and P13?
A None that I knew of.

Q104 The reports P12 and P13 mentioned that the houses that were demolished were squatters home or buildings. To the best of your knowledge, were those houses really squatters houses or buildings?

A That is not true because in 1969 or 1970 when the area was first open, a few of the natives who built their houses in the area were given permits by the office of the Resident and later when system of Resident abolished by the office of the assistant collector of land revenue. With the letters from the authority allowing them to reside at the area, the natives were granted to enjoy whatever facilities available from the government. It was this authority that they were relied upon by the Lembaga Perbandaran Sandakan now Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan that gave the natives the houses number with letters LBS then followed by house numbers which entitle the natives to apply for trading licence which was used by the native to get financial assistance from the government scheme such as “Takun”. The letters issued by the authority to the natives also allowed them to apply for electricity supply, water, telephone and health inspection from medical department such as visits from midwife for women who give birth. The letters also authorized the other relevant department to extend whatever assistance available such as JAKIM in the appointment of imam for the benefit of the muslims in the area. The construction of wet and dry market, public toilet, surau, catwalks, and assistance for poor natives in the form of zinc or iron roof and nets with outboard engine, all of which were issued through the Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan give the implication that this is not the squatters area but were open with the encouragement of the government.

PW2
Q105 In paragraph 20 of your Statement of Claim, you state that as a result of unlawful, malicious and/or negligent act of arresting and detaining the Plaintiff by the Defendants, you have suffered public humiliation, contempt, ridicule and suffered loss and damages. Why do you state so?

A Most of the officers involved in the demolition exercise, I believe are well educated and well trained. We are now able to access almost all information about what is right and what is wrong. The laws says when a crime is committed it is a duty of every citizen to lodge a police report. I did that but was arrested and even paraded in public right in front of Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan where I was once enjoy the respect of all the staff as a councilor and the Pemimpin Kemajuan Rakyat for both the Sandakan Bandar election continuency and Sikong election constituency where my duties are to act on behalf of the elected representatives from both constituencies.

The natives in Sandakan still come to me until this very day seeking advice on native’s laws pertaining to marriages, separations and land matters. Parading me in public with a short handcuff which hurts me bodily is unacceptable act by the so called Polis Di Raja Malaysia.

This kind of action can only happen somewhere else but should not have happened at Sabah unless the Semenanjung people thinks that we are still under their colony.

PW2
Court:

Adjourned to 3.00 p.m


Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie.



Court Resumes at 3.50 p.m.

Parties as before

(Witness reminded he is still under oath).

Continuation of Examination-In-Chief of PW2

Q106 Refer to pages 8, 12, 14 and 18 of PBD1. What are these documents?

A Before engaging Ansari & Co to conduct this trial, the whole matter regarding this suit was done by me myself. In order to properly address the Defendant in this suit that I wanted to file in this honorable Court, I did ask the 4th Defendant for the name of those personnel involved in putting me into the police lock-up that I believe were in accordance with section 5 of the Government Proceedings Act. I requested the 4th Defendant to furnish me their names that was the intention of these letters as exhibited on page 8. Unfortunately this letter was never given any attention by the sub-ordinate of the 4th Defendant, Encik Ripin bin Pulis who is the station master. Encik Ripin informed me for both page 8 and page 12 that he was instructed by the 4th Defendant not to entertain my correspondence should there be any. Due to this attitude I was forced to file into this Court a writ with the names of several Defendants addressed as unknown persons. It was only after the first mention of this case in High Court of Sandakan I told the Senior Federal Counsel that I shall be filing for mandamus injunction to get the 4th Defendant to furnish me the names. The said SFC asked me to write the letter exhibited at page 14. It was only then I managed to get my correspondences entertained by the Ketua Balai Polis Sandakan.

Q107 Are you the author of these four letters?

A Yes.

Mr Ansari::

Apply for these four letters be marked as exhibit.

MrRitikos:
No objection.

Court:

Letters at pages 8, 12, 14 and 18 of PBD1: P14, P15, P16 and P17 respectively.

Q108 You testified that your correspondences were subsequently entertained. Are the letters at pages 17 and 20 of PBD1 the reply that you received from the 4th Defendant?

A That is correct.

Mr Ansari::

Apply for these letters to be marked as exhibit.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection.

Court:

PW2
Pages 17 and 20 of PBD1: P18 and P19 respectively.

Q109 Did you take the photographs show at pages 67 until 93 of PBD1?

A Yes, except 93.
Q110 Who took the photograph at page 93?

A I can’t remember, either my son or daughter.

Q111 What do the photographs at pages 67 until 92 show?

A It was the intention of the forefathers fighting for our independence was to rid our colonial masters and be the master in our own land to better the life of all the people especially the natives who were deprives of almost everything for hundreds years. The photographs on page 67, 68, 69, 70 show exactly the aftermath of the barbaric act of the Defendant causing hardship to the populace. All those people who appeared in those photos page 67, 68, 69, 70 are natives of Sabah.

These are the future generation of this country but before they could be groomed to be better citizen they were forced. The bridges were destroyed forcing them to walk on a piece of plank which is not only dangerous but not acceptable. The planks are the residue of the Jambatan as can seen on page 67, page 68, 69 and 70. These photos I took so that people can see the affect of OPS Nyah II on the natives of Sabah. Likewise 71 clearly show as if the natives of Sabah has been boom by the Israelis. Pages 71, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84 and 85 are proof of the destruction done by the

PW2
Defendants on the houses belonging to the natives. Pages 86 to 88 are some of the natives who are forced to live beside the road when their houses were torn down. Pages 91 and 92 show the wet and the dry market and the surau at Kampung BDC which was built by the government for the benefit of the people residing at kampung BDC. Page 91 shows three roofs of which actually for two markets. The front was for the dry market. Behind the building with the first roof was another building with two roofs was the wet market. I remember very well the cost to construct these markets was about RM350,000.00 and it was borne out of the public fund. Behind this wet market was a public toilet which was also built by the government. On the right hand side of this market was the surau which can be seen in this photograph at page 92. Part of the money to build this surau came from the nation initiated by the previous Minister of Finance Datuk Mohd Noor Mansoor and part of it came from the government. Again public money. This surau and the dry and wet market were built between Jambatan A and Jambatan C of Kampung BDC. They were all demolished by the Defendants.

Mr Ansari::

Apply for these 27 photographs be marked as exhibit.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection.

Court:

PW2

27 photographs at pages 67 to 92 PBD1: P20 (67) to (92)

Mr Ansari::

Also apply for page 93 to be marked as ID21.

Court:

Photo at page 93: ID21

Q112 Did you collect the newspaper cuttings of reports made on OPS Nyah II and other demolition exercise found at pages 21 to 66 of PBD1?

A Yes.

Mr Ansari::

Apply for the newspaper cuttings to be marked as exhibits to show that these reports were printed.

Mr Ritikos:

Pages 32 and 33 had been marked. The others I have no objection.

Court:

Newspaper cutting at pages 21 to 66 (except pages 32 and 33) of PBD1: P22 (21 to 66).

Q113 You informed the Court in November that you were married at Kg BDC. Is the document found at page 94.1 of PBD3 the evidence of your marriage?

A Yes, it is.

Mr Ansari::

Apply for this document to be marked as exhibit.

Mr Ritikos:

No objection.

PW2
Court:

Marriage certificate: P23.

Q114 What are the four articles found at pages 95 to 152 of PBD3 all about?

A These are papers presented by the various high ranking government officers from the State of Sabah explaining what are the customary land rights and so on relating the natives and the land in Sabah.

Q115 How did you obtain these documents?

A Through several seminars which I attended.

No further Question.

Court:

Adjourned to tomorrow at 10.30 a.m.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie.











PW2
3rd February 2009 @ 10.30 a.m.

Continuation of trial.

Parties as before

(PW2minded he is still under oath).

Cross-Examination of PW2:


Q116 In the your 2002, where were your residing?

A My official residential address is at E25, Lorong Pecky Valley 1, Taman Pecky, Mile 2, Labuk Road, 90000 Sandakan. But I also stayed in Kota Kinabalu in my hotel registered under Zaharah Hotel Apartment Sdn. Bhd. situate at Api-Api Center, Kota Kinabalu. Most of the time I also stayed in Kuala Lumpur at my daughter’s house at no. 20, lorong Ceras 29, Taman Ceras Indah, Kuala Lumpur.

Q117 So you did not stay in kampung BDC either in 2002 or before, correct?

A Not in 2002, but before that, yes.

Q118 How long have you stayed at kampung BDC Sandakan?

A Depends. When I learnt reading the Koran from Iman Yusuf bin Encik Karim bin Othman, I used to stay with him for months.

Q119 That was the only time you stayed in Kampung BDC, correct?

A Yes.

Q120 Where were you born?

XXN PW2
A Jalan Satu, Sandakan. The place now has been built with a row of shop houses. The exact place where I was born is the shop now under the name of Restoran Fatimah.

Q121 For yourself do you have a house or a land at Kampung BDC?

A Not physically.

Q122 The place where you stayed Iman Yusuf bin Karm, is it a native land or a native reserved?

A The whole Kampung BDC was a state land.

Q123 It is not a native land, correct?

A It is a state land.

Q124 It is not a native land, correct?

A Depends on how you define it, state land is a native land.

Q125 Is that Kampung BDC specially reserved as a native reserve?
A Not that I know of but I have applied to government to make it

a native reserve.

Q126 Other than staying at the house of Imam Yusof, do you stay in any other place within Kampung BDC before or after 2002?

A Yes, before 2002 at the residence of my uncle the late Sani Bin Jaji where I used to sleep whenever I felt like to and that is where I married my wife.

Q127 Is that particular land the native land?

A It is the state land with all the facilities from the government.

Q128 Is this particular house demolished in OPS Nyah II Bersepadu?

XXN PW2
A Yes together with about 3,000 other houses.

Q129 Is it true all these houses were demolished because they are squatters?

A No, the word “squatters” was only used by the Defendants.

Q130 Do you have any proof to say that the houses belonging to Imam Yusof and your uncle are with proper titles?

Mr Ansari:

I would object to this line of questioning since the question is unfair. It is settled law under the Sabah Land Ordinance that native land could be in the form of titled land or untitled land which is recognize under section 88 of the Ordinance.

Mr Ritikos

I agree with my learned friend. However, it is up to the witness to answer. I will accept whatever answer it is.

A There is no title.

Q131 Can you inform the Court from your knowledge whether the settlers of Kampung BDC have ever been notified to vacate their houses before the OPS Nyah II Bersepadu was carried out?

A No. I have never heard of any notice being issued to any of the natives residing at Kampung BDC.

Q132 You said the natives residing at Kampung BDC in yourA answer, are you saying all those people residing at Kampung BDC are natives?

A No.

Q133 So who are these natives you are referring to?

XXN PW2

A They are people from the Orang Sungai community residing at Kampung BDC. Also the Suluk, Bajau and the others who are define as natives under the Natives Ordinance. Almost all native from various communities can be found residing at Kampung BDC.

Q134 The victims during this OPS Nyah II, are they natives?

A Absolutely, Yes.

Q135 Before the demolition in 2002, how many houses were there in at Kampung Kampung BDC?

A More than 10,000.

Q136 Do you know that this area demolished is a squatter area?

A How can they be termed as squatter when the government has provided them with electricity, water, market and even financial assistance? Definitely they are not squatters.

Q137 Those victims who sought your assistance, did they show you any documents to show that they have a right to built houses on this piece of land?

A Some yes, some no.

Q138 Can you show in your bundle of documents any proof to that effect?

A Not in my Bundle of Documents but I have ask my counsel to issue subpoena to all the relevant government department to bring along all the documents that gave them the authority to assist the natives in the form of providing the electricity, water supply, telephone and of course the construction of the other


XXN PW2

facilities for the benefit of the people residing at Kampung BDC.

Q139 The victims you say who are natives, do you have any proof to show that they are natives?

A The 1st Plaintiff in this suits my brother Ustaz Ridzwan, he is from the Sungai community. His parents and other relatives are also from the Orang Sungai community. They were made victims by the Defendants during the operation of OPS Nyah II. Some of my relatives from my mother side, are from the Orang Sungai community were also made victims. There are other Orang Sungai community from other districts who were also made victims by the Defendants. Apart from the Orang Sungai from Kinabatangan, Labuk or Sugut, there are also people of the Suluk community from Kampung Memiang, Kampung Tembisan, Kampong Tundun Buhangin who were also made victim. Then there are the Bajaus from kampung Tetabuan Beluran, Bajaus from Kota Marudu who were also made victims by the Defendant through OPS Nyah II. I can quote to this Court the various other races some of them are waiting outside this Court at the very moment who possess IC, birth certificate to certify that they are not foreigners but natives of Sabah.

Q140 This Plaintiff Ridwan bin Baharum you mentioned, was he also victim of OPS Nyah II?

A Yes.

XXN PW2
Q141 Do you know in his statement of claim, he never says that he is the victim of OPS Nyah II.

A No.

Q142 How well are you acquainted with the settlers in Kampung BDC?

A It depends on the time that you want me to reply this question. When I was the Ketua Daerah of Sandakan, I used to meet a lot of them. Though I may not know them by names but I have to entertain them to settle their problems.

Q143 From your knowledge, who carried out the demolition exercise at Kampung BDC?

A The Defendants are the main players. Later they were also assisted by several excavators owned by several Chinese taukeys in Sandakan. An operator of one of these excavators told me that he was engaged by the Defendants. Then the removal of high tension electrical cables were done by technician from the electricity department while the disconnection of water supply were done by the people of Jabatan Air. I have recordings of all these disconnections by the various technical people from various department with escorts fully armed with automatic weapons. These recordings are already tendered in this Court in my bundle of pleadings marked as items 2,3,4 and 5.

Q144 Did you yourself see the Defendants physically demolished these houses?

A No.

XXN PW2
Q145 So the Defendants did not demolish the houses themselves, correct?

A Not correct.

Q146 What do you mean?

A They engaged excavators to do the demolition while they stood guard with their automatic weapons to infuse fear in the poor native communities that there would be in the worse case scenario shot if they resisted.

Q147 Do you agree with me that the police were at the site merely to keep the peace and to prevent any untoward circumstances or to nab any illegal immigrants?

Mr Ansari::

When a question is put to a witness, the party must have the basis for doing so since that is their case. It was never pleaded by the Defendants that the role of the police were merely to keep peace or to prevent any untoward incident. In fact, at page 26 of BP1 paragraph 12, the Defendants relied on the statement of the 4th Defendant who told the reporters that he was the person who headed the operation “Kerja kerja meroboh rumah setinggan oleh pihak berkuasa diketuai oleh beliau sendiri (Suhaimi)”. In view of this admission in the pleadings, the issue of the role of the police is a forgone conclusion since the 11th Defendant had also admitted at page 24 second column paragraph 24 page 25 of PBD1 “Ramli pula mengatakan pihak keselamatan tidak akan

XXN PW2
meroboh rumah-rumah penduduk tempatan” and “Ramli said the focus

Mr Ritikos:

The statement referred to by my learned friend was reports published in the newspaper. Whether it is true or not is yet to be proven. Besides, this witness says there were also other government Departments and authorities involved. I am just putting to this witness the case of the defendant what actually the role of the defendants since he is now suing of the police force in the demolition exercise.

Although we did not plead that the police’s presence was to keep peace, but referring to paragraph 11 of the defence, the statement in the newspaper must be proven. Although this is not pleaded but this will be evidence which will come from the witnesses themselves. Even if we look at the evidence of the plaintiff, many of the facts which were stated in Court were not pleaded. If we were to look at the statement of claim, the plaintiff should just confine himself to what he is praying for in the statement of claim. Since he himself had opened to all these facts, it is only fair to put facts which are not pleaded to this witness.

Court:

Objection overruled.

A Absolutely no, I do not agree. From what I can see the police were there not merely as keeping the peace but they are actually the boss of the whole operation.

XXN PW2
Q148 Do you agree that in this sort of operation there must be somebody to head it to give instruction?

A My answer to that is both yes and no.

Q149 But you agree that you did not see the Defendants in your suit personally demolish the houses?

A No.

Mr Ansari::

I would like to refer to paragraph 8 and 9 at page 6 and 7 of BP1. (read thereon)They admit to have demolished the house and to have lead the operation under paragraph 4 of the statement of defence. They cannot now put to this witness that the police did not demolish the house.

Mr Ritikos:

I shall leave it for submission.

Q150 You said prior to 2002 you have instituted legal actions against several officer of PDRM. What are these actions for?

A Against corruption by the police personnel from both Balai Polis Beluran and Sandakan. Against misuse of power when their request for financial assistance from me were not met, they used their police power to harass me and my laborers without basis of rule of law.

Q151 Do you have proof of these allegations of harassment in your bundle?

A No.

XXN PW2
Q152 I put it to you that even before the year 2000 you have grudges against the police force, do you agree?

A No.

Q153 I put it to you that your grudges eventually lead to your present action.

A Not true.

Mr Ansari::

I would like to put on record at the page 51 of NOP the former SFC who was handling the case informed the Court that he had instructed the 10th Defendant Hj Asmara not to mingle with the witnesses for the Plaintiff. I have received complaints that this defendant is continuing to harass our witnesses by making hostile comments in a loud manner. Some of my witnesses have already left the Court as a result of this intimidating behaviour. If the citizens of the country can be bullied in the court building, I do not know where else can they feel safe and secure.

Court

To Mr Ritikos.

In view of what has been said, please advise your witnesses to refrain from behaviour complained of by Mr Ansari.


Court:

Adjourned to 2.30 p.m.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie.

XXN PW2
Court Resumes at 2.45 p.m.

Parties as before

Mr Ritikos

Regarding the complaint made this morning, I have already informed the defendant concerned to refrain from mixing with the plaintiff’s witnesses.

(Witness reminded he is still under oath).

Continuation of cross-examination of PW2


Q154 You said in answer to question 51 that only after you came back in March after your arrest, are you saying that immediately after you came back in March you were arrested?

A Could I request for this question to be rephrased in accordance with question 51?

Q155 Are you saying that immediately after you came back home that you were arrested?

A No.

Q156 When were you arrested?

A At about 5.00 p.m. on the date as stated on my police report.

Q157 What was the date?

A On 22nd March 2002.

Q158 At page 71 of NOP, line 12 to 13 you said the Defendants have exceeded their authority. Can you explain what do you mean by exceeded their authority?

XXN PW2
A The answer to this question, may I request the Court to refer to page 22 of PBD1. The title of this report by Utusan Malaysia dated 11th March 2002 “Operasi roboh hanya rumah pendatang”, it carries the statement by the Prime Minister (read from paragraph 1 ). This statement from the Prime Minister stated the objectives of OPS Nyah II Bersepadu are intended to apprehend illegal immigrants not demolishing “rumah setinggan tempatan”. There are also others report which carries the statement by the Chief Minister of Sabah Tan Sri Chong Kah Kiat which also states the same.

Q159 When you said the Defendant had exceeded their authority, your basis is only based upon on these newspaper reports, right?

A No.

Q160 Were you involved in the decision making or the procedures to be taken in this OPS Nyah II Bersepadu?

A No.

Q161 So you only assumed that the Defendant had exceeded their authority, correct?

A Not correct.

Q162 How do you feel when these houses were demolished?

A The teaching of my religion prohibit me to tolerate any evil things done upon anybody by any person in his right frame of mind. The poor uneducated natives who were made victims through OPS Nyah II were the very people that for years and

XXN PW2
years the government wanted to help to uplift their livelihood. Demolishing their houses can only come from people with evil minds especially when they are supposed to be the protector of the law but they take things for granted without even considering the legal rights of those people they made victims. I feel not only me but every tax payer should condemn this exercise because it was not on the basis of any law in this country.

Q163 Are you saying that even if locals or natives squat on the state land the authorities cannot take any action to evict these squatters?

A Yes.

Q164 So you are saying that anybody can just enter on any land and treat it as their own?

A No. Any land and state land are totally different.

Q165 Since you maintain your answer in Q163, is it not you are now being prejudiced when in the first place you claimed that the Defendants must uphold the rule of law?

A I cannot answer this question in yes and no form. By my training and my experience the natives are entitled to stay, built houses and develop state land. This is the legacy left by the British for the natives under the Land Law. I do not agree that anybody be they native or not native that they can squat on any titled land. That is trespass and is illegal under the Law.

XXN PW2
Q166 From your answer, do you agree that these settlers at Kampung BDC whose houses were demolished were trespassers?

A No. They were encouraged by the elected representatives since USNO time and during BERJAYA government from 1963 to 1976 and from 1976 to 1984.

Mr Ritikos:

I believe my learned friend will be adducing evidence to this effect.

Mr Ansari::

I confirm that I will be calling some of the natives affected by the demolition exercise. They will relate to the Court why they built houses at Kampung BDC.

Q167 Until the houses were demolished in 2002, have this affected piece of land been gazetted as a native land or reserve?

A Some has been gazetted since 1970. As for Kampung Kampung BDC, I have applied since 1980 but not yet gazetted.

Q168 Can you tell the Court what time the 1st Plaintiff Encik Dali telephoned you on the 28th February 2002?

A I could not remember because there were so many phones calls.

Q169 When he called you, what actually did he tell you?

A He told me about the demolition of “rumah saudara-saudara kita di Kampung BDC”..

XXN PW2
Q170 Refer to page 72 of NOP at line 7. You said that when you spoke to the 1st Plaintiff, you advised him to lodge a report and institute legal action against the Defendants. What was your basis when you advice to the 1st Plaintiff to institute legal action against the Defendants since you were not at the site at the material time?

A I believe that is the most proper thing for anybody who felt they have been mishandled by any authorities. The authorities are not above the law and they are not immune from any prosecution. I know Kampung BDC, the background and most of the people. The action by the Defendant demolishing their houses is wrong in law and the best avenue for the victims was through legal process. As I was not there what happen at Kampung BDC is not important but the affected parties should take the necessary action at that particular time.

Q171 This advice was given to the 1st Plaintiff on the day he called you, correct?

A Correct.

Q172 I put it to you that your advice was based on what you felt at that time and not on proper facts gathering by you, do you agree?

A No.

Q173 Refer to page 72 of NOP, line 11 and 12. These peoples you mentioned, are they the natives?

A Yes.

XXN PW2
Q174 What advice you give them?

A As the ex-district chief of Sandakan, there are no better advice to anybody who were made victims by the Defendants action except to engage a lawyer and institute legal proceedings against the Defendants. I do not believe in violence that the victims should take up their arms against the Defendants. That will destroy this country. The process of the Court should take precedence.

Q175 Do you have any proof that these persons mentioned are natives?

A Except for two who are already on wheelchair, all the names mentioned on page 72, line 11 will testify in this Court.

Q176 Refer to page 73 of NOP, line 6. When these peoples came to your house besides advising them to lodge police report, what else did you tell them to do?

A Asked them to get temporary accommodation.

Q177 That’s all?

A Yes.

Q178 You never asked them to fight to their right to remain in their land?

A Through process of the Court, yes.

Q179 How long were they at your house?

A Some of these peoples are like my relatives, they can come and go any time they like to or from my house. As I was sick at that time and I was on the upper floor most of the time, I

XXN PW2
can’t tell exactly who came at what time and who stayed until when.

Q180 From the reports lodged by the victims, these reports were not prepared by the victims themselves, correct?

A Depends. There were several university students whose houses were also demolished. They were the ones who typed all the reports for most of the victims.

Q181 These reports especially at pages 1 – 3 PBD1 were in fact your idea and merely typed by these university students. Do you agree?

A Advising the victims to lodge police report was my advice, yes.

Q183 Is your answer “Yes” an answer to my question?

A Not totally.

Q184 What do you mean?

A These reports were typed by the university students, not by me. The computers used don’t belong to me. Nor were the printer and the papers. I only advised the victims to lodge police report because that is their legal right under the Constitution.

Q185 I put it to you that these reports were not made by the victims themselves but by you.

A No. I disagree.

Q186 Refer to page 73 NOP line 17 until the last line. What actually did you tell these people when you were with them at the corner shop?

XXN PW2
A Lodged police report, engaged a lawyer and go to Court, that was my advice.

Q187 From what time to what time were you with these people at the corner shop?

A It was in the afternoon at about 3.30 to 4.00 p.m. Then I left to the police station.

Q188 And that was then you brought the whole group of people to the police station, is that so?

A Correct.

Q189 Why did you have to meet these people at the corner shop when it was more convenient for you to meet them at your house?

A At that time I don’t have any computers or typewriters in my house. These facilities were available at the corner shop where some of the victim’s children who were the university students made available three or four computers to assist the victims.

Q190 So it is not true that you went to the corner shop with these victims because you can’t stand the influx of victims who came to see you?

A Yes, it is true I went to the corner shop because I can’t stand these peoples keep coming to my house.

Q191 If that is the case, why didn’t you just let them go to the corner shop by themselves without you following them or you bringing them there?


XXN PW2.

A Some of these peoples are my relatives and good friends. More than that they are victims who need assistance. I see nothing wrong to extend whatever help I can extend.

Court:

Break for 15 minutes.

Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie.



Court Resumes at 4.20 p.m.

Parties as before

(Witness reminded he is still under oath).

Continuation of cross-examination of PW2

Q192 I put it to you that your meeting with these people at the corner shop was to instigate or incite these people from going against the authorities from demolishing their houses, do you agree?

A I totally disagree.

Q193 When were you arrested?

A 22ND March.

Q194 When did you come back to Sandakan?

A 18th or 19th March.

Q195 So in the space of three or four days, what did you do with these victims?

A Nothing. I was sick at that time, I could hardly walk because of gout.

Q196 That was until you are arrested?

XXN PW2
A That is correct as far as my gout is concerned.

Q197 You could not move but you have all the energy to bring these people to the corner shop and also to the Balai, do you agree?

A No.

Q198 I put it to you that within this space of three or four days you had ample time to instigate or incite these people in going against the authorities. Do you agree?

A I totally disagree.

Q199 At the Balai Polis Sandakan, how many people did you bring along to the Balai on the day of your arrest?

A I did not bring any.

Q200 Where were these fifty victims you said when you were at the Balai Polis?

A Some were already at the Balai when I arrived. While some others were on their way by bus which one of the victim owned.

Q201 So how many victims were there when you arrived at the Balai?

A I did not count.

Q202 Thirty, forty?

A When I arrived, there were more then ten elderly ladies and a few males who were already queuing on the walkway of the Charge room where the police manning the counter was stationed.

XXN PW2
Q203 So where were these fifty victims you said in your evidence?

A Some were disembarking from the bus outside the Balai Polis gate.

Q204 What was your purpose of going to the charge room where there were two male police personnel manning the desk?

A To ensure the victims are not deprived of their rights, to lodge the police report and to ensure the victims lodged their report properly.

Q205 Are you saying that these victims will be deprived of their rights?

A The government were forced to form Suruhanjaya Penambahbaikan Image Polis because throughout Malaysia incidences of Police personnel refusing the poor uneducated members of the populace from lodging police report. The answer is yes.

Q206 I put it to you that by answering “yes” you are only assuming.

A Not true.

Q207 When Inspector Majari came down from the 1st floor, and when you said, “He rudely orders the victims to lineup”. At that time how many victims were there at the Balai Polis inside the Balai Polis?

A Please define inside the Balai police.

Q208 When you went inside the balai polis to make the report, you had to enter through the front door. I am not referring to the car parking area or the walkway.

XXN PW2
A I shall confine my reply to the victim in the charge room which numbered about 10.

Q209 Beside these victims were there also other members of the public at the charge room at that time?

A` I am not aware of that.

Q210 So am I correct to say that even if Inspector Majari ordered the victims to line up, he was only doing so to keep peace and order at the Balai?

A No. I do not agree to that.

Q211 I put it to you that Inspector Majari was never at that time acted in uncivilized manner or rudely or in a harsh and loud voice ordered the victims to line up.

A No, I do not agree to that.

Q212 I put it to you that all your allegations are mere assumptions.

A No, I do not agree to that.

Q213 I put it to you that you are only making assumptions of how the victims are being treated by the Defendants because until now you still hold grudges against the police force.

A No, this is totally not true.


Court:

Adjourned to tomorrow at 11.00 a.m.


Signed. Y.A. Puan Yew Jen Kie.