Saturday, July 31, 2010

PENGARAH JUMPA ORANG MATI?




Oleh: ZEILAH A


MANTAN Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Anak Negeri Sabah, Haji Mohammad Said Hinayat dalam keterangannya di Mahkamah Tinggi Sandakan mengakui bahawa Kwan Ah Hee ada datang berjumpa beliau pada 30 Oktober 2007 untuk mendapatkan surat pengesahan status Anak Negeri Sabah.

Namun apabila diberitahu Peguam Ansari Abdullah bahawa Kwan Ah Hee telah meninggal dunia pada 8 Ogos 1997, Mohammad Said secara selamba mengatakan bahawa tiada siapa memaklumkan kepada beliau bahawa Kwan Ah Hee telah meninggal dunia seraya memberikan alasan ‘monyet’ bahawa ramai orang yang datang berjumpa beliau pada masa itu dan tidak kenal mana satu Kwan Ah Hee.

“Saya menerima surat daripada Ketua Daerah yang memperakui bahawa Sijil Anak Negeri bagi keempat nama yang disebutkan adalah teratur,” kata Mohammad Said yang menjadikan alasan untuk mengeluarkan surat pengesahan terbabit.

Berikut adalah nota prosiding mahkamah untuk rujukan pembaca;

Examination-In-Chief of PW6

Q152 : What is your present designation with the government ?

Said Hinayat : Under Secretary Chief Minister’s Department.

Q153: Did you serve as director of Native Affairs Sabah in October 2007?

Said Hinayat: Yes.

Q154 : Refer to IDD4. Are you the maker of this document?

Said Hinayat: Yes.

Q155 : Can you inform the Court whether Kwan Ah Hee the 1st name person in the document came to see you on 30/10/2007?

Said Hinayat :I can’t recognize this person because there was a lot of people that came to see me.
Q156: Can you explain to the Court what is the meaning of paragraph 2 of your letter?

Said Hinayat : Paragraph 2 means “the named above” but I don’t recognize them.

Q157 : What was your basis for issuing this letter confirming all the four persons named as natives of Sabah?

Said Hinayat : I received a letter from District Chief stating that the native certificates of the four name above were in order.

Q158 : Did you yourself make any inquiry or investigation as to whether the four persons names in IDD4 were in fact natives of Sabah?

Said Hinayat : No. I fully depend on this letter.

Q159 : Do you have a copy of the letter from the District Chief that you mentioned in your evidence?

Said Hinayat : Yes.

Q160: Do you have the original of this letter?

Said Hinayat : No, only a copy.

Q161 : Can you inform the Court where is the original since this letter was address to you?

Said Hinayat : In the office file.

Mr Ansari: Apply for this letter to be marked as ID since it is not the original neither he is not a maker.

Mr Siew: No Objection

Court: Letter dated 30/10/2007 from Mahkamah Anak Negeri to Pengarah Pejabat Hal Ehwal Anak Negeri Sabah is marked as ID14.

Q162 : Do you know that on 30/10/2007 Kwan Ah Hee was no longer alive?

Said Hinayat : No. Nobody informed me.

No further Question

Mr Siew: Apply for ID14 marked as exhibit.

Court: ID14 converted to exhibit D5.

Mr Cheu: Apply for IDD4 marked as exhibit.

Court: IDD4 converted to exhibit D4.

Cross-examination of PW6 by Puan Suzannah:

Q163 : Refer to D4. Why did you say that persons name above came and see you on 30/10/2007 when Kwan Ah Hee was no longer alive at that time?

Said Hinayat : As I stated earlier I don’t recognize this person and as there was so many people came to see me and nobody told me that this person was no longer alive.

Q164: If you don’t recognize them how you can say that they came and see you?

Said Hinayat : So many people came to see me regarding the same matter so I put in my letter “penama-penama telah datang”.

No further Question.

Cross-examination of PW6 by Puan Zaleha:

Q165 : Refer to D4. Can you tell the Court why did you address the letter to Pengarah Jabatan Tanah dan Ukur, Kota Kinabalu?

Said Hinayat : This letter address to Pengarah Jabatan Tanah dan Ukur because they usually asked for this letter.

Q166 : For what purposes?

Said Hinayat : As mentioned in the letter.

Q167 : It is in respect of paragraph 5 that is the land matter.

Said Hinayat : Yes.

Q168 Earlier on you said that it is because of land matters as stated on paragraph 5. Do you agree with me that it is only for land matters and not for other matters?

Said Hinayat : Yes.

No further Question.

Re examination of PW6

Q169 Can you recall who exactly ask for this letter?

Said Hinayat : I can’t remember but the aim for this letter is regarding the four names above.

Q170 : Can you explain why you specifically address this letter to Director of Land and Survey Department?

Said Hinayat : This letter so obvious address to Director of Land and Survey Department. So many people came and asked for this kind of letter and address to Director of Land and Survey Department as stated in paragraph 5 of this letter.

No further Question.

Court: Witness released.

Mr Ansari: My client the 1st Plaintiff was served with a sealed copy of the order made by the Court of Appeal at 9.00 a.m. this morning. He had earlier instructed Tan Pang Tsen & Co to file application for leave to appeal against the order made by the Court of Appeal on 4/6/2010.

He also had an appeal pending in the Court of Appeal on the refusal by the learned Judicial Commissioner Puan Yew for an injunction to be granted against the 1,2nd and 3rd defendants. He had also file an application for stay in the Court of Appeal on the order granted by the Court of Appeal on 4/6/2010. He had instructed the same firm to file an appeal against your Lordship order to set aside the erinford injunction on Monday 13/7/2010.

He as a director of the 2nd Plaintiff company informed me that most of his workers are under work pass guaranteed by the 2nd Plaintiff. He needs to obtain alternative accommodation to house these people as the 2nd Plaintiff are responsible under the work permit to ensure that the workers remained in the employment of the 2nd Plaintiff for the duration of the work permit.

It would be an offence if he allows the workers to leave the employment of the 2nd Plaintiff without revoking their work permits and sending them back to their country of origin.

He also needs to mobilized the 2nd Plaintiff’s machineries and equipments, food supplies, fuels and other lubricants and related items from the quarters that were built by the 2nd Plaintiff.
In view of all these he asked me to inform the Court that he can only surrendered possession in two weeks time.

I was informed earlier that while I was taking instructions from Mr Hiew that your Lordship had indicated to the parties that the application filed by 1st and 2nd defendants earlier today would be disposed off after completion of the testimony of the subpoena witnesses. I humbly beg the Court for the Plaintiff’s to be allowed to continue with the trial since it had been 11 months that the order was made for retrial by the Court of Appeal.

On behalf of the 5th and 6th Defendants who are in Court because they were dragged in by the 1st, 2nd and 3rd defendants, we also apply for the proceeding to continue since three days has been reserved in this matter and both of them are not parties to the dispute between the Plaintiff and the Defendants.

The 5th Defendant is a businessman who was awarded a Justice of Peace by the Head of State and he is living for the past five years under a cloud of allegation of fraud and conspiracy brought by the 1st,2nd and 3rd defendants. He wanted his name to be cleared as soon as possible as his good name and reputation is at stake. These have cost him to suffer undue distress and embarrassment. If your Lordship is minded to adjourn the proceeding by the Plaintiffs than this suit should be separated and the Counterclaim should be tried forthwith.

Mr Tsen: We have been served by the application by the Defendants for stay on the retrial and has not been fixed yet. Pending the disposal of this application the Plaintiffs should be allowed to continue to give evidence so that we can close the Plaintiff’s case by tomorrow. Unless and until the Court makes an order to stay the retrial time should be wasted and this matter should proceed.

Court: Application directions or stay by all the Defendants will be heard at 2.30 p.m.

Signed. YA Tuan Lee Heng Cheong

15/7/2010 @ 12.55 p.m.

(The rest of the page is intentionally left blank)

EMAIL MUTALIB M.D DICEROBOH



Oleh: HAFIZ JAMAIL

SETELAH Sabahkini.net menjadi mangsa ‘Hacking’ penggodam antarabangsa yang tidak bertanggung jawab menggodam setiap hari, kini email Editor Sabahkini.net pula diganggu dan diceroboh pihak tertentu yang memadam semua arkib email yang terdapat dalam mutalibmd@gmail.com.

“Saya tidak akan bertanggung jawab jika ada pihak menerima email daripada akaun tersebut mulai jam 8 malam tadi (31 Julai 2010) kerana pada saat itu semua email saya hilang dan kemungkinan ada pihak telah menggunakan email tersebut untuk menghantar email kepada pihak tertentu,” kata Mutalib ketika menghubungi editorial daripada Medan, Indonesia.

Email berkenaan masih boleh digunakan tetapi telah ditukar kata laluan yang lebih sukar dicapai penggodam. Bagaimanapun Mutalib mencadangkan agar para pembaca atau penulis yang ingin menyumbangkan karya agar menggunakan email sabahkini.net@gmail.com

Menurut Mutalib, Sabahkini.net dan beliau sering menjadi sasaran sejak kes Michael Chia didedahkan di Sabahkini.net pada Februari 2009 dan turut menggodam Sabahkini.net sehingga banyak data rosak dan operasi Sabahkini hampir lumpuh.

“Sistem buzzer dan amaran yang dilengkapkan pada server Sabahkini.net bukan mudah untuk digodam oleh penggodam tempatan dan memerlukan jutaan ringgit untuk memusnah sistem Sabahkini.net. Ianya mungkin dibiayai satu kumpulan penjenayah yang didalangi VIP tempatan,” ujar Mutalib M.D yang menggesyaki ianya dilakukan oleh Kumpulan Michael Chia Tien Foh dan Gundiknya, Yap Siaw Lin @ Kiki Yap serta Kwan Famili.

Bagaimanapun tegas Mutalib, serangan dan gangguan berterusan ini tidak mematahkan semangatnya untuk terus menjadi salah satu Blogger Terkemuka Sabah walaupun terkadang kala Sabahkini.net terpaksa beroperasi daripada http://sabahkinimirror.blogspot.com

“KAMI MAHU MyVi, BUKAN VOLKSWAGON”




SOKONG…Musa Lingkius tengah, Majiadih kiri manakala Simon di sebelah kanan menyokong kepimpinan seorang guru.


Oleh: JACKSON LU

PENDIRIAN seseorang ahli merupakan agenda penting ketika melahirkan seorang pemimpin yang boleh diketengahkan sebagai pemimpin yang berwibawa dan berketrampilan bagi menunjangi kepimpinan PKR Tenom untuk meneruskan perjuangannya sehingga ke PRU13 sebagai sandaran kejayaan dan kecemerlangan PKR.

“Ia bukan suatu perkara jenaka semata-mata tetapi ia perlu diseriuskan. Kita tidak mahu lagi dibutakan mata dengan wang ringgit hanya kerana kepentingan peribadi tetapi maruah diri terus tercemar malah kampung kesayangan juga turut tergadai,” tegas Majiadih O.T Matalih, mantan Setiausaha Cabang PK Tenom ketika memberitahu Krew Sabahkini.net.

Majiadih berharap pemilihan kepimpinan cabang PKR di sini yang akan berlaku dalam bulan September ini dapat melahirkan saf kepimpinan yang boleh menjadi sandaran kepada ribuan ahli PKR di Parlimen Tenom di mana pemimpin itu harus bercirikan perwatakan yang baik, bersih, amanah dan bebas daripada kegiatan rasuah dan penyelewengan di masa lalu.

“Masyarakat KDM di sini harus menebus maruah mereka di masa lalu yang pernah dijolokkan dengan sindiran ‘Murut senang diurut, Dusun senang disusun’. Bagi dua tiga botol stout saja sudah selesai. Apakah kata-kata ini akan berulang lagi?” tanya Majiadih lagi.

Dalam pada itu, seorang ahli dan penyokong kuat PKR ranting Kg Lalang Ulu Tomani, Musa Lingkius, 50, menyokong penuh halatuju Ambrose Mail Mathew (AMM) calon Ketua Cabang PKR Tenom di mana halatuju itu yang digariskan menerusi Pelan Transformasi PKR Tenom sangat baik dan ia selari dengan pemikiran rakyat di sini.

“Kami baru juga mendapat agehan kertas model itu di mana sebelum ini kami tidak sedar ada lagi pula pemimpin tempatan yang berwibawa bertanding merebut jawatan Ketua Cabang PKR Tenom. Kalau boleh, kami mahu orang tempatan,” tegas Musa.

Ketika ditanya sama ada beliau pernah dijanjikan sesuatu termasuk wang ringgit supaya menyokong seseorang Musa berkata,”Kami tidak boleh disogokkan dengan wang ringgit lagi kerana sekarang zaman moden. Sogok menyogok zaman dulu dulu. Tapi kalau kami diberi wang, kami ambil. Bila undi, kami pilih orang sendiri yang boleh bekerja untuk rakyat,” tambah Musa.

Musa seterusnya menegaskan bahawa, apa yang beliau harapkan apabila menyertai perjuangan adalah ingin mendapat suatu pembelaan yang adil dan saksama terhadap kawasan tanah dan perhutanan yang sudah habis dimiliki kerajaan dan agensi kerajaan tetapi tidak dipertahankan hak milik rakyat itu oleh wakil rakyat di kawasan ini.

“Itu sebab kami mahu Ketua PKR Tenom mesti orang yang cergas dan orang sendiri kerana jika dia orang sendiri, dia memahami kesulitan kami. Kami ahli PKR di Kg Lalang sudah berbincang soal pemilihan akan datang ini di mana kami memutuskan mahu menyokong seorang bekas guru kerana dia pun pernah mengajar sekolah di sini suatu ketika dulu. Jadi dia tahu selok-belok masalah kami,” tegas Musa yang memberi jaminan bahawa mereka memberi sokongan padu kepada calon berkenaan.

Manakala Simon @ Timoer Bani tidak akan berganjak menyokong perjuangan ‘Guru’ yang beliau sifatkan mempunyai wawasan yang baik dan memberi harapan cerah kepada perjuangan PKR, termasuk berpotensi memenangi PRU13 jika semua ahli terus bekerja keras sepertimana yang terkandung didalam Pelan Transformasi ilham Guru berkenaan.

“Kita buang masa menyokong orang luar dan pemimpin yang diibaratkan sudah senja di mana tidak relevan lagi dalam situasi sekarang. Orang lain sudah pakai kerita Myvi kenapa masih guna Volkswagen buruk? Walaupun kereta ini tahan tukul tapi sudah tiada spare parts lagi. Out dated,” tegas Simon disambut gelak ketawa.

MPS TERLALU BIADAP DAN KURANG AJAR?



MALANG….Pengerusi JKKK Kg Istimewa, Ansar menunjukkan salah sebuah rumah malang yang bakal diroboh. Manakala gambar sisipan, PKR Sekong, Jantapa menunjukkan surat notis roboh yang dikeluarkan oleh MPS atas desakan pihak kontraktor

Oleh : SHAIMON S JUMADI

TINDAKAN pihak Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan (MPS) mengeluarkan notis meroboh 14 buah rumah yang membabitkan 30 keluarga atas desakan pihak kontraktor tanpa pengetahuan para pemimpin masyarakat, wakil rakyat dan juga pemilik rumah terbabit dianggap sebagai biadap terhadap masyarakat setempat.

Pemimpin Kemajuan Rakyat (PKR) kawasan Sekong, Jantapa Zainal Abidin, berkata kepada Ketua Biro Sabahkini.Net Wilayah Sandakan, sepatutnya sebelum pihak MPS mengeluarkan notis kepada para pemilik rumah berkenaan hemdaklah mengadakan perbincangan terlebih dahulu dengan PKR, CDO, JKKK, Ketua Kampung ataupun dengan Wakil Rakyat kawasan Sekong dan Ahli Parlimen kawasan Batu Sapi untuk meminta sedikit pandangan mengenai perobohan tersebut.

Kata Jantapa, kita tidak menghalang usaha kerajaan untuk membangun apa jua projek di satu-satu kawasan kerana ini juga merupakan satu kemajuan untuk kepentingan rakyat.

Tetapi pihak MPS yang bersekongkol dengan pihak kontraktor mengeluarkan notis roboh kepada 14 buah rumah dan membabitkan 30 keluarga secara mendadak tanpa beruding di samping membelakangi pemimpin seperti ADUN Sekong ini; adalah dianggap kurang ajar dan biadap.

“Nama saja orang Malaysia tetapi tidak belajar adat dan sopan satun dan mereka ini sama saja seperti orang-orang barat,” tegas Jantapa lagi.

Ketua Biro Sabahkini.Net sempat membaca surat notis arahan perobohan struktur rumah yang bertarikh 23 Julai 2010 yang ditandatangani oleh Setiausaha Perbandaran MPS antara lain menyebut;

“Menurut Kuasa di bawah Undang-Undang Kecil Bangunan (Pindaan 1982) By-Law 2(2) saya memohon dengan mengarahkan tuan/puan untuk merobohkan struktur tersebut dalam tempoh 21 hari dari tarikh penerimaan ini. Sekiranya tuan/puan gagal berbuat demikian, Majlis akan meroboh dan memindah struktur tersebut pada 13 0gos 2010 tanpa sebarang kenyataan dan pihak majlis juga tidak akan bertanggungjawab di atas segala kerosakan atau kehilangan harta benda semasa operasi perobohan dijalankan.”

Seramai 30 keluarga yang membabitkan 14 buah rumah termasuk sebuah surau yang melibat 3 buah kampung antaranya Kampung Karamunting, Kampung Istimewa dan Kampung Simpang Lupak Meluas mereka yang terbabit bakal kehilangan tempat kediaman buat selama-lamanya kerana rumah-rumah mereka terlibat dengan projek melebarkan Jalan Bokara ke Batu Sapi.

Yang menyedihkan sekali, kata Jantapa, sekiranya pembongkaran 14 buah rumah itu menjadi reality, apakah nasib mereka nanti dan di mana mereka akan tinggal, lagipun kesemua mereka itu adalah rakyat tempatan.

Tegas Jantapha, sedangkan binatang seperti kambing dan ayam mempunyai tempat tinggal yang selesa, malahan dibina reban (kandang), apatah lagi manusia? Inilah sikap sesetengah pegawai kerajaan yang suka bersekongkol dengan pihak kontraktor kerana mahu mendapat habuan daripada kontraktor berkenaan sehingga sanggup membunuh nasib anak bangsa sendiri.

Kata Jantapa, kerana rumahnya juga terlibat dengan projek tersebut mereka tidak dapat tidur lena kerana memikirkan mahu pandai ke mana sedangkan mereka belum mempunyai rumah baru sebagai tempat berteduh.

Sementara Ketua Biro Sabahkini.net telah menemui Naib Ketua Cabang Parti Keadalian Rakyat (PKR) kawasan Batu Sapi Ahmad Hj Ibrahim untuk meminta ulasan mengenai tindakan drastik pihak MPS.

“Pada pandangan saya, dengan tindakan zalim pihak kerajaan khususnya MPS terhadap rakyat, khususnya kepada 30 keluarga terbabit ini, sebenarnya pihak MPS memberi ruang seluas-luasnya kepada parti pembangkang untuk menjadi kerajaan pada pilihanraya umum ke 13 nanti,” tegas Ahmad Ibrahim.

Dalam hal ini, kata Ahmad Ibrahim, parti pembangkang tidak menghalang hasrat murni kerajaan untuk memajukan dalam aspek pembangunan tetapi pada masa yang sama, mereka yang terlibat rumah mereka bakal diroboh berikanlah sedikit pampasan yang setimpal; sekurang-kurangnya mereka tidak menanggung beban yang berat,” ujarnya Ahmad Hj Ibrahim yang turut simpati terhadap nasib malang 30 keluarga yang bakal merempat di tanah air sendiri.

Berbanding dengan orang pelarian dan PTI kata Ahmad, telah diberi keistimewaan yang cukup lumayan tetapi rakyat tempatan menjadi kucar-kacir seperti rakyat di Negara Palastine.

HARI PAHLAWAN DISAMBUT SEDERHANA




HADIR….Kelihatan Liew, bersama Raymond Tan dan James Wong sedang menghayati sajak yang dideklamasikan ABM Fajeer.

Oleh : SHAIMON S JUMADI

MAJLIS Sambutan Memperingati Hari Pahlawan Peringkat Daerah Sandakan Tahun 2010 yang diadakan di Dataran Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan disambut secara sedarhana sahaja.
Lebih 200 pasukan berunifom daripada pelbagai pertubuhan termasuk Tentera, Polis dan Rela telah turut serta menghadiri majlis tersebut.

Sejurus selepas mereka menyanyikan lagu Negaraku dan lagu Sabah Tanah Airku kemudian disusuli oleh upacara memperingati Hari Pahlawan dengan tiupan ‘Last Post’ dan bacaan sajak yang disampaikan oleh Timbalan Presiden Majlis Perbandaran Sandakan (MPS) Hj ABM Fajeer sambil diiringi oleh tiupan bungle.

Istiadat meletakan karangan buka di Tugu Peringatan, Dataran MPS, Timbalan Menteri Di Jabatan Perdana yang juga selaku Ahli Parlimen Sandakan Datuk Liew Vui Keong telah mendahuli upacara meletakan karangan bunga di tugu peringatan tersebut.

Selanjutnya diikuti oleh dif-dif jemputan kehormat yang membabitkan ADUN Elopura Au Kam Wah; ADUN Tg Papat Datuk Raymond Tan; Ketua Polis Daerah Sandakan, Pegawai Memerintah KD Sri TLDM, Pegawai Memerintah 22 RMD, Pegawai Memerintah Batalion 15 PGA Sandakan, Pegawai Memerintah Polis Marin Sandakan, Presiden MPS James Wong dan juga pengerusi-pengerusi persatuan bekas tentera, polis dan ketua-ketua badan NGO.

OKK WILLIAM ‘CHIEF KHADAM’ KELUARGA KWAN



Oleh: ZIELAH A

PEKONG bernanah yang cuba disembunyikan OKK William Majimbon yang memperkenalkan dirinya sebagai Ketua Daerah Kota Kinabalu selama ini akhirnya terdedah apabila peranannya melakukan dwi-fungsi yang bertentangan antara satu dengan yang lain didedahkan olehnya sendiri di Mahkamah Tinggi Sandakan.

Di samping melaksanakan tugas sebagai Ketua Daerah Kota Kinabalu beliau juga turut memainkan satu peranan sulit menjadi ‘gunting dalam lipatan’ (Brutus) kepada kepentingan Kaum Anak Negeri Sabah.

Walaupun secara hakikinya beliau bertugas sebagai Ketua Daerah Kota Kinabalu yang menerima gaji daripada Kerajaan Negeri Sabah, OKK William Majimbon juga adalah ‘Chief Khadam’ yang menjalankan kerja sulit kepada jutawan Kwan Ngen Wah dan Kwan Ngen Chung.

Demikian fakta didedahkan sendiri oleh OKK Wiliam Majimbon pada 28 Julai 2010 ketika memberi keterangan bersumpah di Mahkamah Tinggi Sandakan buat kali yang kedua di hadapan Pesuruhjaya Kehakiman, Tuan Lee Heng Cheong.

OKK William telah disapena buat kali kedua ekoran pendedahan oleh bekas Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Anak Negeri Sabah, Haji Mohammad Said Hinayat.

Dalam keterangan bersumpahnya sebelum ini, Haji Mohammad Said mengatakan surat sokongan kepada mendiang Kwan Ah Hee dan anak-anaknya yang dikeluarkan olehnya selaku Pengarah Jabatan Hal Ehwal Anak Negeri adalah berasaskan kepada surat yang dikemukakan kepadanya oleh OKK William Majimbon.

Surat Haji Mohammad Said Hinayat, mengesahakan keluarga mendiang Kwan Ah Hee adalah keturunan Anak Negeri berasal dari Sabah. Mahkamah dimaklumkan bahawa surat Haji Mohamad Said telah dikeluarkan berasaskan surat OKK William Majimbon dari Pejabat Mahkamah Anak Negeri, Kota Kinabalu yang tidak dijelaskan oleh OKK William ketika memberi keterangan pada kali pertama dia disapena.

Pada 15 Julai 2010, Haji Mohammad Said mengakui ketika memberi keterangan bersumpah di Mahkamah Tinggi Sandakan di hadapan Pesuruhjaya Kehakiman, Tuan Lee Heng Cheong dia adalah pembuat surat yang dialamatkan kepada Pengarah Jabatan Tanah dan Ukur menyokong mendiang Kwan Ah Hee, Kwan Ngen Wah dan Kwan Ngen Chung berketurunan kaum Anak Negeri berasal daripada Sabah yang layak memiliki tanah di bawah syarat NT.

Menurut isi kandungan surat bertarikh 30 Oktober 2007 itu, Haji Mohammad Said Hinayat memperakui telah ‘berjumpa sendiri’ mendiang Kwan Ah Hee sedangkan sebelum ini, seorang saksi daripada Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara memperakui Kwan Ah Hee yang berbangsa Cina telah meninggal dunia pada 8 Ogos 1997.

Dalam keterangan bersumpahnya, OKK William juga memaklumkan mahkamah bahawa dia ada melakukan kerja-kerja lain atas permintaan Kwan Ngen Wah.

Menurut OKK William Majibon dia ada berusaha menghubungi Ketua Daerah Tuaran bertujuan merisik rahsia mengenai lawannya atas permintaan Kwan Ngen Wah.

Antara saksi baru yang turut disapena memberi keterangan adalah bekas Pengawal Pejabat Mahkamah Anak Negeri Haji Karim B Ujud yang telah dinaikkan pangkat sebagai Kerani Mahkamah Anak Negeri di Kota Kinabalu sebagai membalas jasanya membuat laporan polis palsu berhubung isu kehilangan fail dan doket Kwan Bersaudara.

Atas arahan daripada OKK Wiliam, Haji Karim Ujud dipercayai telah membuat satu laporan palsu kepada Polis mengenai Buku Daftar Mahkamah dan atau fail Mahkamah yang kononnya telah musnah.

Berikut adalah petikan nota prosiding OKK William setelah disapena buat kali kedua untuk memberi keterangan di MahkamahTinggi Sandakan pada 29 Julai 2010.

Mr Ansari: I am recalling PW4 to give his evidence.

PW4 recalled.

Witness reaffirmed.

Further Examination-In-Chief of PW4

Q551 : You testified under Q102 that IDD4 (now marked D4) is a letter of confirmation from the Director of Native Affairs Sabah. The then director Haji Said Hinayat (PW6) informed the Court that he wrote IDD4 based on a letter you sent to him. Can you inform the Court why did you write the said letter (D5) in 2007 to the director? (Shown Q157 and the answer at pages 67 and 68 of NOP)

OKK William: It is the administrative function of Mahkamah Anak Negeri upon request from the Native Certificate Holder to issue confirmation with the regards to the status of the Sijil Anak Negeri before they refer the said matter to the Director of Native Affairs Sabah.

Q552 : Can you inform the Court how were you able to issue D5 when you testified that the dockets for Kwan Ngen Wah and Kwan Ngen Cheng could not be located in 2006? (Refer to Q106 and the answer at page 51 of NOP)

OKK William: I issued the letter based on the original natives certificate submitted to the native Court Sembulan and also I did mention before based on the signatories in the Natives Certificate.

Q553 : You have any personal interest in this action?

OKK William: No.

Q554 : Did you make any inquiries with the Mahkamah Anak Negeri Tuaran on the Natives status of the Plaintiff Hiew Kon Fah?

OKK William: I forwarded a letter to Mahkamah Anak Negeri Tuaran based on the request from Mr Kwan since the status of Anak Negeri of Mr Hiew was not issued by Kota Kinabalu.

Q555 : When did you ask Haji Karim to lodge the report (IDD5) that you mentioned in answer to Q110?

OKK William: I believe I have given the copy of the police report at the last hearing. I cannot recall the date but may be you can ask Hj Karim when did I ask him to lodge the police report .

Q556 : Do you always forward letters sent to you in respect of matters in other districts to the respective district such as what you did in answer to Q554.

OKK William: Especially if the matters concerned Natives Certificate issued from other Mahkamah Anak Negeri of other district.

Q557 : Why did you find it necessary to see the district chief of Tuaran personally after writing the letter to the Tuaran Native Court in respect of Hiew Kon Fah’s native certificate?

OKK William: It is not only matters related to Hiew Kon Fah’s other matters belong to other person especially Sijil Anak Negeri from Papar, Penampang, I will personally see the respective District Chief.

No further Question.

Mr Cheu: No cross-examination.

Mr Cheng: No cross-examination

Puan Suzannah:

Q558 Referring to question 554 why didn’t you ask Mr Kwan to write formally to the Mahkamah Anak Negeri Tuaran instead of taking it upon yourself to help him?

OKK William: As I mentioned in the answer to Q557, it is a matter of administrative that we just forward the letter to the respective native Court if the concern Sijil Anak Negeri issued by the native Court concern. This not only happened to Mr Kwan’s case, we do refer cases personally if the native Court is within reach like Papar, Penampang or Tuaran.

Q559 : When did Mr Kwan write to you?

OKK William: I was give a copy of the native certificate of Mr Hiew and I informed Mr Kwan that it is not issued by Kota Kinabalu Native Court but under the Tuaran Native Court and I mentioned to him that I will write to the respective Native Court for the confirmation.

Q560 : When did Mr Kwan give you the Native Certificate?

OKK William: May be two or three weeks ago.

Q561 : Did Mr Kwan ever write to you?

OKK William: I was only given a copy of Sijil Anak Negeri.

Q562 : So therefore there was no letter from Mr Kwan?

OKK William: I did not request an official letter from Mr Kwan since I have the copy of Sijil Anak Negeri.

Q563 : So Mr Kwan met you and gave you the Native Certificate of Mr Hiew only?

OKK William: It is somebody by the name of Mr Khoo and not Mr Kwan. I know that Mr Khoo is working for Mr Kwan so I assumed that he is instructed to come to Mahkamah Anak Negeri for verification of Sijil Anak Negeri.

Q564 : Why would you entertain an oral request instead of asking the person to write formally to you?

OKK William: As I mentioned earlier I have the Photocopy of the Sijil Anak Negeri it is part of my job to forward it to the respective Mahkamah Anak Negeri.

Q565 : Is it part of your duty to see personally the respective District Chief when there is no formal letter accompanying the request?

OKK William: I did forward the letter to Mahkamah Anak Negeri Tuaran so since the District Chief is also my friend it is only a matter of courtesy and since I also on the way to other places nearby (Tamparuli) .

Q566 : So you knew Mr Kwan personally?

OKK William: Everybody who come to Native Court all my friends so not necessary only Mr Kwan.

Q567 : Do you know him?

OKK William: I only know him when I meet him during this case.

Q568 : What is actually your relationship with Mr Kwan?

OKK William: There is no relationship, I am just a government officer and Mr Kwan is a businessman.

Q569 : So Mr Kwan being a businessman can ask you to do things without even giving any formal letter?

OKK William: Definitely no, I am not instructed by Mr Kwan, it just my function to not only to Mr Kwan but to everybody.

Q570 : I put it to you that you wrote the letter and then meet personally with the district Chief of Tuaran, agree?

OKK William: I agree but I still want to mention here that I just drop by the office and it is a matter of courtesy I am on the way to Tamparuli.

Q571 : I put it to you that it is not coinsidence for you to go to Tuaran and help Mr Kwan. Agree?

OKK William: I agree.

No further Question.

Cross-examination of PW4 by Puan Zaleha:

Q572 : You said that you have no jurisdiction in respect of matters within the purview of Tuaran Native Court so do you agree with me that there is no need at all for you to write to Tuaran Native Court?

OKK William: We will write not only to Tuaran as I recall, if there is a request of application of public for verification of Sijil Anak Negeri provided that we have a copy of the said Sijil Anak Negeri.

Q573 : But OKK, we are talking about jurisdication and my question is since it is not within your jurisdiction there is no need for to write to Tuaran Native Court?

OKK William: Since it was referred to Mahkamah Anak Negeri Kota Kinabalu and I agree with you that I had no jurisdiction that is the reason why I referred to said district Mahkamah Anak Negeri jurisdiction.

Q574 : Are you saying that you entertain all oral requests irrespective whether or not it is within your jurisdiction?

OKK William: It is not the matter of entertain its just part of our function as Mahkamah Anak Negeri to refer such matter to the relevant Mahkamah Anak Negeri.

Q575 : Are you saying that it is part of your function?

OKK William: It is our function it is not part of our function.

Q576 : I put it to you that there is no need for you to write a letter to Tuaran Native Court. Agree?

OKK William: I disagree.

Q577 : I put it to you that it is not your function to act as coordinator for all natives’ matter, which is not within your jurisdiction. Agree?

OKK William: I disagree.

Q578 : So when you wrote that letter to Tuaran Native Court you are aware of on going suit. Correct?

OKK William: Yes.

No further Question.

Re-examination of PW4

Q579 : You informed the Court in answer to Puan Suzannah question under Q563 that it was one Mr Khoo that met you and gave you a copy of Mr Hiew’s native certificate. Can you give the Court Mr Khoo’s full name?

OKK William: I only know him as Mr Khoo.

Q580 : How did you know he was working for Mr Kwan?

OKK William: I remember Mr Khoo because he is the one who took the letter D5 from my office.

Q581: Can you please answer my question?

OKK William: Because D5 is meant for Mr Kwan.

No further Question.

Court: Witness released.