Wong (third left) arrives at Sibu Court Complex with his supporters.
SIBU (July 26): Dato Sri Wong Soon Koh says he has no regrets for making a statement on the settlement between the state government and Petronas on the state sales tax which led to him being sued for defamation by the administration.
Speaking to reporters during a break in the proceedings on the first day of the suit’s hearing today, the Parti Sarawak Bersatu president insisted that his statement posted on Facebook last year was in the interest of the people of Sarawak.
“I don’t regret that (the statement). As an elected representative of the people of Sarawak, I must question the move by the state government.
“What I questioned will not just affect this generation. It is going to affect our grandchildren and our great great grandchildren. The sales tax involves revenue and revenue involves money which directly affects the people,” he said.
Wong, who is also Bawang Assan assemblyman, said he would leave it to the court to decide if he really defamed the state government.
“In fact, I raise questions and it is a very simple thing for them to reply to my questions. Why do they need to sue me? They must reply to my questions. In fact they should tell the people what suddenly happened,” he said, referring to the amount paid by Petronas to the state government.
During the proceedings today, the state’s de facto law minister, Datuk Sharifah Hasidah Sayeed Aman Ghazali, took the stand as the plaintiff’s first witness.
The media was not allowed to cover the hearing which is scheduled to be held until Friday.
State Legal Counsel Dato Sri JC Fong represented the state government, while judicial commissioner Christopher Chin presided over the case.
Wong is facing the RM5 million defamation suit for his statement published via Facebook on May 9 last year.
In the post, Wong asked the Sarawak government to explain to the State Legislative Assembly and the people why Petronas was allowed to pay only RM2 billion when it owed RM3.8 billion in the tax.
He also questioned the deal struck between the Gabungan Parti Sarawak (GPS) and Petronas for Sarawak on its petroleum rights in exchange for the payment of RM2 billion which Petronas was already obligated to pay under a court order.
The state government had denied those allegations.
In April, Wong’s lawyers had subpoenaed Petronas chairman Tan Sri Ahmad Nizam Salleh to give evidence and produce documents on behalf of the defendant.
The state government then filed an application seeking the court to set aside the subpoena on the ground that Ahmad Nizam did not have personal knowledge of any facts leading to the defamation suit nor of the negotiations and discussions leading to a joint statement between the state and the corporation.
Ahmad Nizam also filed an application seeking the court to set aside the subpoena on the same grounds as the state government.
However, on April 13, the court ruled that it was satisfied the subpoena was not oppressive on Ahmad Nizam as his evidence would be material to the suit.
In a separate application, the court denied and dismissed Wong’s bid to make an amendment to his statement of defence by adding: ‘Plaintiff has no locus standi to commence the action herein against the Defendant and/or’.
The state government opposed the amendment on the ground that the state government can sue a person or a party for defamation as a statutory right.