How did the court’s refusal to allow Wong Soon Koh’s testimony affect Chong’s defence?

Question

Accepted Answer

Court of Appeal Upholds Defamation Ruling Against Chong Chieng Jen

The Court of Appeal has affirmed a High Court decision that found Sarawak DAP chief Chong Chieng Jen liable for defaming the Sarawak government and the Sarawak Financial Authority (SFA). This ruling stems from Chong's 2013 allegations that RM11 billion in state funds had disappeared. The appellate court also increased the damages awarded to the state entities and mandated Chong to pay legal costs.

During the appeal proceedings, Chong's legal team contended that the trial judge had erred in quashing a subpoena intended to compel former state finance minister II Wong Soon Koh to testify. The defence argued that Wong Soon Koh's testimony was crucial for their case, suggesting that his evidence could have supported Chong's defence. However, the plaintiffs, representing the Sarawak government and the SFA, countered that the trial had been conducted appropriately and that a retrial would impose undue prejudice and inconvenience.
Impact of Subpoena Decision on Defence

The central argument for a retrial, as presented by Chong's counsel, hinged on the trial judge's decision to set aside the subpoena for Wong Soon Koh. The defence team maintained that this prevented them from presenting vital evidence that could have substantiated Chong's position. The refusal to allow Wong Soon Koh to testify was thus framed as a significant impediment to a full and fair defence.
Court's Reasoning for Dismissing Appeal

While the reference content indicates Chong's lawyer argued for a retrial due to the subpoena issue, it does not detail the Court of Appeal's specific reasoning for upholding the High Court's decision to set aside the subpoena. The appellate court's unanimous dismissal of Chong's appeal suggests they found no reversible error in the original trial proceedings concerning this matter, thereby not allowing for a retrial based on this contention.
Increased Damages and Costs

Beyond the core defamation finding, the Court of Appeal also modified the financial penalties imposed on Chong. The damages awarded to the Sarawak government and the SFA were raised from RM150,000 to RM300,000. Furthermore, Chong was ordered to pay RM150,000 in costs to the respondents, reflecting the outcome of the appellate proceedings.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

How did the court’s refusal to allow Wong Soon Koh’s testimony affect Chong’s defence?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends