Witness says she was told to burn evidence By Suraini Andokong
KOTA KINABALU: A former agent for Jalinan Rakyat (JR) Umno testified in the Kimanis parliamentary seat election petition hearing that she did not bring any evidence to the Election Court here yesterday to show that some RM156,000 “wang saguhati” (money) allegedly distributed to other JR fellows and voters at her polling zone in the 14th General Election (GE14) as she was asked to burn the evidence.
The 65-year-old Juniah @ Masniah Umpai, who was testifying before Justice Dato’ Lee Heng Cheong, did not mention any name of person who asked her to do so but only said “buktibukti tu sudah disuruh bakar” (all the evidence were ordered to be burnt).
Under cross examination by lead counsel for Datuk Seri Anifah Aman, lawyer Hj Ansari Abdullah repeated his question twice to emphasise if there was any evidence she brought to court, to which the witness answered, “Tidak ada” (none).
The question asked by Ansari was based on her witness statement that she had allegedly distributed the money on May 8 and continued the next day after people had cast their votes at about 3pm at the houses of the voters who were under her care at Kampung Mandugi.
Apart from that, the witness also said in her statement that a few days after GE14, she claimed that she was contacted by one Hajah Suraya via WhatsApp message that an instruction was given to her to burn all evidence related to JRs, names of voters under her care and handbill believed to have contained the political party’s logo and details of voters, who had received the “wang saguhati”, because she was told that the Malaysian AntiCorruption Commission would come to carry out investigations.
To another question by Ansari, the witness, who was a former Native Chief’s representative, agreed that Anifah himself never gave her any “wang saguhati”.
“But Anifah asked his people, whom he believed, to do so,” added the witness.
Ansari: Where, when and who were the people asked by Anifah to give the cash to you?
Witness: I don’t remember where and when but the person was Hajah Suraya.
The counsel further asked: “Did you witness Anifah give the cash to Hajah Suraya?. Witness: “No”. The witness also agreed that her answers were not based on her personal knowledge but rather based on what she was told.
To another question by Ansari, the witness also testified that for Kimanis parliamentary, apart from Hajah Suraya, her leaders were also Anifah and one man whom she referred to as Datuk Mohd Hj Alamin.
The witness then agreed that all instructions she received were directly from Hajah Suraya, who received instructions from Anifah.
The witness also said that apart from one occasion at the party’s office in Bongawan, she never heard of any instructions or seen Anifah but only from Hajah Suraya.
To another question by Ansari, the witness clarified that her statement was not true when she said that she alone received the “wang saguhati” amounting to RM156,000, but the truth was four of them received the cash and there were vouchers signed by the four of them.
She explained that the four of them were one Haji Jeno, one woman named Viani and a young man believed to be Viani’s son and herself.
The petitioner, Karim had filed his election petition to challenge the election result for Kimanis in the GE14, on June 18 at the High Court here.
Datuk Karim Bujang cum Parti Warisan Sabah candidate had named Datuk Anifah @ Haniff Amman as the first respondent and the returning officer (RO) and Election Commission (EC) as second and third respondents respectively.
Counsel Frederic Chang, Syaiful Sufyyan Sidin and Wilson Lai Wai Shing represented Karim; Anifah was also defended by counsel Peter Lee Kong Chung, Roland Cheng, Rizwandean Bukhary M. Borhan, Safrin Saleh Nain, Muhamad Amirul Amin, Tengku Ahmad Fuad Tengku Ahmad and Wilson Chang Khai Sim while RO and EC were represented by counsel Muammar Julkarnain, Faizal Sarbi and Abdul Fikry Jaafar Bin Abdullah.
The trial resumes today.