cross-examine.....

assalamualaikum...seperti yang dijanjikan tempohari, kali nie kaie nak "mention" kes seorang pegawai JAIS (jabatan agama islam sarawak )v TV3...kali nie firm yang kaie buat attachment nie mewakili palintiff.kes nie ibicarakan di mahkamah Sesyen Shah Alam dihadapan hakim Puan Latifah...

so, pagi tue kaie bersegeralah menunggang motosikal menuju ke Shah Alam sebab kali nie en Hanipah mintak tolong die semasa cross examine witness...for sure, apabila kita menyebut, cross examine it will refer to opponent's witness.before cross examine by plaintiff's (in case defendant's witness) counsel,defendant's counsel akan lebih dahulu membuat examination in chief...

hearing start at 11 tapi kaie sampai Shah Alam at 1045am, tengok2 en Hanipah lebih awal sampai Shah Alam, da la sesat sampai kompleks menteri besar...sampai je, agak nervous gak sebab nie first time involve in proceeding in court, after salam dgn en Hanipa, then he asked me to sit next to him,to help him, i'm shocked, i'm expecting that he just only ask me so sit at the back, and just hear the proceeding..life is not so simple as we ecpect, en Hanipa asked me to take note from cross examine yang akan die buat...satu ilmu yang saye pelajari ialah, a judge,upon power vested on him may ask examination in chief, untuk dibuat in written form untuk memendekkan masa mahkamah...tugas counsel pada mase ini ialah cuma mintak witness baca such question and confess that such questions are true...

dalam mase yang same, mahkamah juga akan baca question tue, and opponent counsel may ask the court to delete new fact which never arise before or or fakta2 yang memang tidak dipersetuju sejak dari awal proceeding or anythings yang inadmissable in the proceeding seperti hearsay...

kali nie, witness adalah defendant's witness...

brief fact of the case is that, palintiff was an officer of Jabatan Agama Islam Sarawak (JAIS) in the enforcement department while defendant was a private television station known as TV3..palintiff brought an action against defendant for malicously and falsely made in thier BuletinUtama, Buletin Pagi and Berita terkini saying that plaintiff had made statement that Sukan Bina badan is forbidden in Islam...this issue arise when a TV3 's correspondence reporter interviewed participants of a Pertandingan Bina Badan...They said that plaintiff made statement that Sukan bIna Badan is forbidden where in contrast plaintiff said Pertandingan Bina Badan is haram...later particular reporter went to interview plaintiff but plintiff refused...next, that reporter went to interview Mufti of Sarawak pertaining that matter..it was argued before the court that reporter had interviewed wrong person becaause Mufti and plintiff were not in the same department , supposely that reporter interview the director of JAIS...

plaintiff's counsel argued that defendant failed to make fair comment (in tort) pertaining that matter..

do you think plintiff will succeed?...based on tort law, does defendant liable for slander?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Procedural law:
in case of counsel wish to bring witness, firstly there will be examination in chief by the counsel fir his witness...after finish examination in chief, opponent's counsel will cross examine...followed by re examine by counsel....

mention on behalf: this is a trend in law that our opponent will ask us to MOB (mention on behalf) on thier part...normally in case of no hearing is involve but just mention for the case...biasanya MOB happen when we have another case which more important than present case, e.g (present case hanyer sebutan but another we have hearing)