Racist Utusan Malaysia Reporter Was Shivering When Cornered By the Defense Lawyer In Karpal Singh Court Case

Not satisfied with bias coverage by Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian, I made a decision to boycott those two newspapers in November 2007.This has been going on until now. After reading Karpal Singh Sedition Case coverage by Malaysian Insider this morning, I just realised that I had made one of the best decision throughout my life so far. Those two newspaper especially the Utusan Malaysia is the UMNO propaganda tool (psychological warfare or PSYWAR tool) against the opposition to ensure that the most racist party in Malaysian UMNO will remained in power. The two newspapers will try all out to paint Pakatan Rakyat with bad image by cheating the rakyats with theirs false report. Please read the report below on how one of Utusan Malaysia reporter who wrongly intrepretated Karpal Sing's press statement "ultra vires" to "insulting the Sultan". His wrong intrepretation of the press statement which was then published in Utusan Malaysia , has angered the Malay. Please read the report below on how the Utusan Malaysia racist reporter was cornered by Karpal Singh defence counsel led by his own son Jagdeep Singh Deo during the cort hearing yesterday.

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 12 — Utusan Malaysia reporter Mohd Nizam Mohd Yatim told the High Court today that he thought the phrase “ultra vires” contained in a press release issued by Karpal Singh meant the DAP man was insulting the Perak Sultan.

Mohd Nizam, the prosecution’s first witness in Karpal’s sedition trial, was subjected to a rigorous cross-examination by defence counsel Jagdeep Singh Deo, and appeared rattled by the lawyer’s questions.

At one point the Utusan Malaysia reporter did not appear to even know what Karpal Singh was being charged with.

The reporter was also unable to show a clear understanding of the barrage of questions by Jagdeep on the four-page press statement distributed by Karpal during a press conference on Feb 6 this year. Based on a report written by him and published by the newspaper, Mohd Nizam had been put on the witness stand by the prosecution to show that Karpal had committed sedition. By questioning him over his understanding of what transpired during Karpal's press conference, the defence was attempting to prove he was an unreliable witness. The DAP chairman and Bukit Gelugor MP was charged with sedition on March 17 for saying Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin's removal as Perak mentri besar by Sultan Azlan Shah could be questioned in a court of law. The veteran lawyer-politician was charged in the Sessions Court in KL before judge Mohamad Sekeri Mamat under Section 4(1)(b) of the Sedition Act 1948. Karpal is further accused of several other seditious statements related to the entire Perak constitutional crisis which began two months ago. He is accused of committing the crime during a press conference at his law firm here on February 6. Mohd Nizam was questioned earlier by the deputy public prosecutor Azlina Rasdi. Azlina had asked Mohd Nizam to tell the court who was at the press conference as well as where it was held, before requesting the reporter read the press release provided. She also asked him to summarize the contents to the court. Mohd Nizam: “If the Sultan still wants to pick Zambry as mentri besar then Pakatan Rakyat government has no choice but to take legal action.” He added that after the press conference there was a question and answer session. He told the court that a reporter asked Karpal if he would be suing the sultan. “Karpal said yes,” Nizam said in his testimony which was later challenged by the defence. During cross-examination, Jagdeep had asked the 38-year-old reporter: “Do you agree that his (Karpal) view on the constitution is sought after?” Mohd Nizam: “I am not sure.” Jagdeep: “Do you agree that he (Karpal) is known as a smart laywer?” Mohd Nizam: “I am not sure.” Jagdeep: “If you still do not know after eight years working then you should start doing your work properly.” Jagdeep then proceeded to ask him if he understood the press release since it was in English. Mohd Nizam: “I only understand it in general and not thoroughly.” Jagdeep then asked the reporter if he agreed that what was said in the press conference was only an opinion of the constitutional crisis in Perak. “I only report and do not give opinion,” Mohd Nizam replied. The answer appeared to irritate Jagdeep who accused Mohd Nizam of being insincere. Jagdeep then told Mohd Nizam to read part of the press release to the court. Mohd Nizam: “Although the orders have been confirmed by the Sultan. If the decision is ultra vires then the decision can be adjudicated by the court.” Jagdeep then asked Nizam to explain what ultra vires means to the court. Nizam looking confused and replied: “To insult.” Jagdeep then told Mohd Nizam that his misunderstanding of the word had caused chaos in the country because the word actually means “beyond the powers”. Mohd Nizam was then asked what questions were thrown at Karpal during the press conference. Nizam explained that reporters wanted to clarify if Karpal meant that he was going to bring the Sultan to court. “So do you agree that Karpal did not say that he will sue?” Jagdeep asked. “Agree,” Nizam replied. After the cross-examination, the defence team requested Judicial Commissioner Azman Abdullah for the witness’s cross-examination to be adjourned until it could question another witness on the transcript of the press conference. Azman then asked the prosecution to call its next witness. But the prosecution could not bring its next witness, an RTM reporter, because he had failed to show up and could not be contacted. The trial was then adjourned to another date.

To all Malaysians, if you love this nation, I would like to urge everyone to boycott these two newspaper the Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian.

Mupok aku

"Agi Idup Agi Ngelaban"