No, 6B, Jalan Abdullah
Off Jalan Bangsar,
59000 Kuala Lumpur
Media Statement 18/9/2012
P. Uthaya’s Sedition trial: Lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon replied to DPPs’ Prolix Cross Examination by Accused.
In reply to Deputy Public Prosecutor Noorin Badaruddin’s sumissions that P. Uthayakumar’s Cross Examination is Prolix (lengthy), Senior lawyer Manjeet Singh Dhillon today appeared for P. Uthayakumar before K.L Sessions Court Judge Ahmad Zamzani bin Mohd Zain.
Among the salient points raised by Manjeet is P. Uthayakumar’s constitutional right to a complete trial to defend himself. In a Cross Examination, Manjeet submitted three rights of the accused:-
1. Right to present the defence case on relevant issues.
2. Right to challenge all the Prosecution case
3. Right to test credibility of Prosecution Witnesses.
Manjeet submitted that the Accused has a right to say the truth about the nine (9) different issues (concerning the Malaysian Indian poor) as contained in his alleged letter to the then British Prime Minister The Rt Hon Gordon Brown M.P dated 15/11/07. The truth is a defence in the Sedition Act that is open and available to the Accused in his Cross Examination.
Manjeet also pointed out the procedural irregularity which had vitiated this trial in that the trial commenced on 13/1/2010 where P. Uthayakumar was charged on 11/12/07 for Sedition committed between 15/11/07 to 8/12/07 at Menara Mutiara Bangsar, K.L. However on 4/6/12, some two years later in the middle of the trial the Prosecution had amended the charge and had moved the happening of the facts from K.L to Seremban, a different town and state. So what happens to the accused right to an Alibi Notice by virtue of Section 402 of the Criminal Procedure Code to enable inspection and which has to be served 10 days before the trial. “Was it procedurally correct may well Render or vitiate the trial” said Manjeet.
In reply to the DPPs’ argument on Uthayakumar’s Prolix Submissions, Manjeet replied that Uthayakumar is trying to establish evidence and urged the Court to allow him to completely exhaust all his defence by virtue of Sections 5 to 16 of the Evidence Act. And never through arbitrarily stopping Uthayakumar’s Cross Examination.
The Judge held that he had inherent powers to give any directions deemed fit. The Judge held that he does not deny the Accused right to Cross Examine but it must be confined to relevant facts of the case and wants the case not to be dragged but completed by December 2012!
The continued hearing is fixed from 24th to 26th September 2012.
Note : Uthayakumar was in ISA detention for 1 ½ years thereafter and the was a stay of proceedings Order by the High Court for about one (1) year pending appeal to the Court of Appeal that this Sedition Act is ultra vires the Federal Constitution.
You might also like
Media Event 18/9/2012 : P. Uthayakumar’s Sedition trial : Submissions on Unprecedented Prolix Cross Examination objections by DPP
P.C: 7/6/12: A.G’s application to stop Uthaya’s detailed cross examination of CPO Dato Acryl Sani Abdullah in Sedition trial Hindraf letter to Gordon Brown.
Media Event 8/6/2012: Decision on application to recuse Judge in P. Uthayakumar’s Hindraf letter to Gordon Brown Sedition trial.
Hindraf de facto Leader P.Uthayakumar Sedition High Court application to recuse Sessions Court Judge,DPP & groundless charge postponed as Counsel hospitalised.
Predictable biased UMNO Judge to rule tomorrow to stop Uthayakumar’s detailed Cross Examination of CPO DCP Dato Acryl Abdullah in Hindraf Sedition trial.
Uthaya’s Sedition charge on “ethnic cleansing” letter to ex U.K PM. Sessions Court rejects stay of proceedings pending Federal Court appeal.
Media Event 13/8/2012 :P. Uthayakumar’s Sedition trial ordered to proceed @ full steam despite Prime Minister Najib Razak’s policy decision on 11/7/12 announcing repeal of obsolete colonial era Sedition Act 1948.
P.C: 24/2/2012 ; Decision on Hindraf de facto leader P. Uthayakumar’s Sedition appeal to Court of Appeal social “ethnic cleansing” letter to Gordon Brown