Case 332/13 Follow up - Banjar Jailed 6 months for not paying sogit and contempt of court

PENAMPANG. The Native Court here ordered a 25 year old Bajau to be imprisoned for 6 months under Clause 10 (1) (iii b) of the Native Courts Enactment 1992/1995, for failing to pay any of the “sogit” or customary penalty imposed on him since February this year. The imprisonment shall commence from the date of his arrest by the Police.

The panel of judges consisting of District Chief Bryan Matasing, Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun and Village Head Rita John made the unanimous decision from the bench taking into account that the defendant was in contempt of court for purposely not attending the hearing today, Thursday 4th Sept 2014.

 

The plaintiff informed the court that the defendant had arrived earlier outside the courtroom and after offering to hold the baby for a while, he immediately disappeared with the baby and later sent an SMS to the baby’s mother that said, “either you listen to them or to me”. A copy of this SMS was taken by the court as evidence.

 

According to the facts of the case, the 25 year old man who is unemployed but sometimes sells cloths, was fined RM5300 for “mianu-anu”(illicit intercourse) under Clause 10(1) and another RM3000 under Clause 21 (1) for taking away a daughter without the consent of the parents, in a verdict passed by the same court in February. He was also ordered to return the 21 year old girl to her family and the baby from the illicit affair would be raised by her as a single mother.

Instead he managed to blackmail the girl to come back to him without paying any of the fines and honouring any of the promises he had made in the past.

This forced the girl’s mother as plaintiff to return to the court for further actions and assistance.

 

Meanwhile the girl as the co-accused was grateful to her parents for paying to the court her RM700 sogit for “mianu-anu”, otherwise she would face one month jail sentence. She promised before the judges not to go back to the man but to return to her parents, claiming that he had beaten her while they were together. She will also make a police report to get her baby back.

 

In summing up the case, District Chief Matasing gave the girl a long counselling to understand and comply with her own “adat” (native custom) in order to protect herself, and not to hesitate in making a police report if the man threatens her again.

 

Outside the court, the girl’s father informed that the man even made fun of the native adat saying there are no such things in his community. Maybe his race is lawless and have no civilised customs, he added.

BLOGGER NOTE:  This was reported in Daily Express under heading "Offender is jailed 6 months in absentia" on 5th Sept 2014.

However due to paperwork processes and also the brother of the offender came to beg for leniency and time to pay at the native courts, the Bajau was only sent to jail on 6 November at Kepayan.

He would be held for six months while the girl jailed for one month. I wonder who is looking after their kids, but maybe the parent of the girl.

CASE NO 86/14 - Jikinon Vs Sikui

Missed attending the early hearings but manage to follow site visit on 21st March 2014.  Date of Verdict 27 August 2014
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case title: Menyerbu, Mencari Hal, Mengeluarkan Kata-kata Kesat dll

or Tresspassing or raiding neighbours house, uttering obscenities and slander, Causing trouble, damages etc.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Plaintiff: Daughter of a Building Contractor representing the whole family

Defendant:  A father and 3 sons who are neighbours.

Summary of Plaintiff's testimony:
At about 5 pm (date not noted) I heard the neighbours consisting of the father and 3 sons shouting, "'whoever closed the road would be killed"
The situation looked serious so prevented my father from going out, instead watch the outside from the CCTV camera.
We saw the sons overturning the washing machines outside and shouting slanders and obscenities.
( Later on outside the court the mum gave examples of such slander:
1.  That the daughter is having sex with the chairman of the local JKKK and perhaps siding with the family in the road access dispute
2.  That the son should go and fuck his own mother)
We then heard the mechanical shovel being started and a threat to pull down the house if they don't come out. The shovel was later found in the river.
Their passenger Hilux was also damaged with a baseball bat and stones. The CCTV camera was then pointed upwards. Later on the police arrived to cool down the situation.

My father has spent RM16K to build a new road for the neighbours because they always passed infront of our house at dangerous speed which nearly hit one of our little kid at one time.

Defendant's response:

Admitted the incident occurred because his mum was ill and the sons want to send her to hospital but found the road blocked by the mechanical shovel, the hilux and other vehicles.  I phone the police but got the same answer, that everytime it is always that neighbours name.
When I arrived home I saw 6 vehicles blocking the road so I started the mechanical shovel but it moved in all direction.
He admitted having damaged the bonnet and the glasses of the hilux.
When the police arrived, they ordered all the vehicles to be moved.
We don't know who built the new road, nor do we know for whom.
I have brought the matter to the District Officer but never get any solution. Therefore we plead not guilty to all the charges.

Site Inspection on 21st March:
Present were both parties, meaning the father and sons on one side and the contractor on the other.
Also present were the Ketua Kampung of KUAI and the chairman of the local JKKK.
From the Native Court was NC Andrew S Lidaun, two village heads from other kampungs, one court clerk, one WKAN Pius and a driver.
( and reporter of course)

Well the photographs below speaks a million words, he he he

Verdict: By NC Andrew, NC Woritus and KK Rita (unanimous of course)

Summing up:

Police report was made by the daughter as plaintiff, the DO has approved the case to be heard in the native court.
On the site visit, they found that the road is not perfect but can be used however the defendant were still using the road infront of the plaintiff's house.

The new road can be used when he asked on of the sons to drive his car along the road.

(NC Andrew did ask the sons to test the road, and their sporty car was still able to drive along the road though it was rather too close to the river bank)

The distance between the two houses is only about 100 feet.
Question: why take such drastic and hasty actions including damaging properties and using abusive language? Problems should be solved via the authorities such as police, ketua kampong and chairman of JKKK.
Raiding, attacking, trespassing, slander and taking the law into your own hands are certainly wrong. We have taken into account 25 photographs and CD recordings from the CCTV as evidences.
The court orders the road infront of the plaintiff to be closed for the sole use of the plaintiff and family. The new roads can now be used by all others since we understand that added improvements have been made since the site visit. If any defects is found, the village head shall apply for allocations for their repair.

The fathers from both families are distantly related and thus both family should follow the spirit of 1 Malaysia where both should help one another in times of needs. Instead the defendant admits the incident occurred and yet say he is NOT guilty.

The Sogit will be as follows:-

1. For trespassing and threats to attack causing extreme fear ( “noiduan sunduvan” in Kadazan) the sogit was one pig or RM500 under Clause 41.

2.  For uttering slanderous remarks the sogit was also one pig or RM500 under clause 36.

3.  For throwing stone at the house directed to the security CCTV, the sogit was RM300 under Clause 45.

4.  For starting the engine while not the qualified operator of the mechanical shovel causing it to move dangerously is all direction, the sogit was RM300 and for damaging the bonnet, plate number and the windscreen glass of a Hilux vehicle, another  RM300 under Clause 58, all of which comes under the Native Courts Enactment 1992/1995.

 

The defendant is given 14 days to pay the fine.

 

The father representing the defendant then interrupted " Saya bayar sogit sekarang" to which the court rebuked. "kamu boleh bayar diluar mahkamah, iaitu di Pejabat."

 

Court was then adjourned for the last time.

 

 

PHOTOS of Site Inspection:

 

 

Kinda give the image that a native court hears cases under the trees, but this is site inspection of the case. KK Rita in dark specs with WKAN Pius nearby.

 Ketua kampong of Kuai giving his point of view

 Native Chief Andrew walking about taking photographs and wearing the Native Court Vest.

 The new road built at the edge of the river, still not so safe at that time. The shed at the right was later removed in order to widen the new road and away from the river bank.

 Position of the new road compared to the old one where the plaintiff has built his workshop.

 Road continuing to the defendants house.

This sukun tree sadly had to be chopped down to widen the new road

The workshop infront of the plaintiff's house which is rather monopolising the river bank reserve land.

 



The sons testing the new road track with their sporty sounding car



This kampung chicken was enjoying a sandbath under the plaintiff's hilux, oblivious of all the arguments and fights amongst the humans.  he he he he he he he he he he h

CASE NO 39/14 Gomiti vs Daughter and boyfriend

PENAMPANG. A 58 year old mother from Kg Kituau testified to the Native Court here that her 24 year old daughter had lived together with her 29 year old boyfriend resulting in the birth of a boy which is now 4 years old.

A member of the bench commented that this is no longer a “hubungan sulit” or secret liaison case in view of the age of the son, however the plaintiff said she only knew the case recently when it became public knowledge that the child was born before any marriage had taken place.

She also confirmed that no engagement or any other receptions as per the native traditions were carried out, and both parents have never given any blessing to their relationship. She had submitted the case for settlement in accordance to the native “adat” of Penampang.

 

In response, the daughter as first defendant simply confirmed her mother’s testimony but added that she had already broken up with the boyfriend one year ago and does not want to get married as she is not ready. The court then warned her that if she ever wants to get married, she should ask the parents to follow the proper process as the panel would not like to see her back in court.

When asked, she affirmed ready to face the penalty from the native court.

 

The boyfriend as second defendant also did not contest the charges and confirmed willing to accept the penalty in accordance with the adat.

He also admitted having married previously and then divorced and had converted to Islam. For this reason he cannot marry the first defendant as she does not want to convert.

On the maintenance of the son, he claimed giving expenses direct to the school.

 

However, his mother who was present in court and permitted to speak outside the witness stand, informed that she will assist her son to provide RM150 per month until he has grown up. She added that she also assist in fetching the kid to and from the school.

 

After recording all the testimonies, the panel of judges comprising the District Chief Bryan Matasing and Native Chiefs Andrew S Lidaun and Woritus Paulus then set the verdict on 26 August.

=====================

Yes, today is 26th August 2014 and time for the update:

At 9:30 am the Native court convened.  The same panel of judges were on the bench.

The judges announced that after investigation and studying the case, they have come to a unanimous decision that the two defendants have breached the native customary adat by their act of "mianu-anu" under section 3, clause 10 (1) of the Native Court Enackment 1992/1995.

The sogit totalling RM6000 consisted of:

To be paid by the boyfriend to the mother of the girl:
2 heads of livestock or RM3000
Another head of livestock or RM1500 for kepanasan kampong Kituau or appeasement of the village.
Court cost of RM800.

The girl who is also part of the offence of mianu-anu was only fined RM700 as part of the court cost.

Since the girl now has gone back to stay with the mother, the court then advised the mother to take care of her daughter and question her and boyfriend if she ever had another one, and to ensure they follow the adat and get married properly instead of breaching the adat as before.

Also the court said, although the couple can appeal the decision of the native court to the district native court presided by the District Officer, that would be illogical since both the defendants have admitted openly that they were guilty as accused by the mother.

Court is Ended.

 

The Mango tree and concrete culvert case from Guunsing, Case Number 227/13

 

 

Penampang.

Plaintiff:  LYS

Defendant:  DL

 

both from kg Guunsing.

 

 The Native Court here heard a suggestion by a 56 year old self-employed man for the defendant to go to some resorts and relax and calm himself in his retirement.

He was testifying before Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun who was assisted by two village chiefs.

 The plaintiff said he know the man as a good person but now seemed to be behaving in a manner inconsistent with what he had assumed, because of his age.

 The 71 year old retired civil servant had accused him of cutting down two mango trees and stealing two concrete culverts from his property which is about 150 metres from the plaintiff’s house.

 

The plaintiff then submitted several photographs to the court showing that the culverts are still lying on the defendant’s land and the house there supposedly belonging to the defendant’s sister is dilapidated and has been abandoned for about 8 years. He had brought the case to the native court for settlement as he has not done anything wrong while the accused seemed to be monopolising Kampung Guunsing and even known to have beaten other people. The police report made against him by the defendant is without basis and not relevant.

 

Inside the dock, the defendant claimed he is still waiting for the result of his police report and the case is also heard in the magistrate court which is also pending the police report. He said that he has no power to direct the police to speed up the investigation.

 

However, the court countered that he was already given 3 months previously to bring any feedback from the police regarding his complaint and during the third hearing, he had failed to turn up. The case had been pending for more than 5 months without any results.

 

The defendant tried to add that the plaintiff is a Sino without any Native Certificate but he was ticked off by the court as this is not relevant to the case before him.

 

The court then gave him one last chance within one month to get any feedback from the police to prove his accusation against the plaintiff failing which judgement can be made against him.

The court was adjourned until 10 July 2014.

CASE CONTINUED ON 10/7/2014 as scheduled.  9.15 am

Hearing continued before District Chief Bryan Matasing Lojingon
assisted by NC Andrew S Lidaun and KK Michael Sigawal

Defendant in the dock said that he failed to present any police investigation results to back up his allegations against the plaintiff.

Next Witness Inspector Mohd Najib as IO - IP Penampang Dept CID section. Serving in Sabah since April 2010

Regards to private complaint only received on 7 July 2013 from the defendant.
the original report made on 4 May 2013 which is rather aged in time.

the report was referred to a magistrate in Kk who have on 21 may 2013 ordered further investigation
Since he only received that order on 7 July 2014, time for me to make further investigation and produced a written report is short.
No police action done because the defendant who made the report himself cannot give any solid witnesses, clues or info as to who stole the goods from his house. Hence further investigation cannot be done without any clues if the plaintiff  is the one who took the materials, goods etc

In good faith, my opportunity to investigate further due to time,
- no solid witnesses seing the theft
- time factor, theft occurred long time ago
- case is not a public interest, but personal interest since the goods dont have markings or serial number to trace.
Therefore up to the honourable court to make an appropriate decision since the two parties involved are locals.

Hence the court today makes an immediate decision which is unanimous based on NO witnesses by the defendant and all the informations  said on court so far.

Under Part 2 Clause 6 of the MAN enactment 199'/1995 the defendant is found guilty for causing provocation.

Fined is one head of livestock or in default pay another RM500, jail not exceeding 1 month or BOTH.  Pay the sogit which is one domestic PIG or both. The fine to be paid to the plaintiff.

Pay within 14 days or appeal within 60 days.

Defendant immediately told the court that he wish to appeal whereby the court said go and fill up a form.  The court then adjourned the case.

Plaintiff inform that he too will sue for defamation at the session court in KK.

Case ENDS pending whatever actions both parties take.
 

CASE NO. 127/14 - Transfer by PDRM to Kuala Lumpur Caused Marriage Breakdown

 Penampang. The Native Court here heard that work transfer for three years to Kuala Lumpur was the main cause for the marriage break-down between an Administrative Assistant and her husband whose profession was undisclosed, both are 31 years old.

The case was the first open hearing for newly appointed District Chief, Brian Lojingon who was assisted by Native Chief Andrew S. Lidaun and Village Chief Rita John.

 

The plaintiff who came from Kg. Sugud also testified that her husband even accused her of having a boyfriend in Kuala Lumpur because he had waited too long for her to return even though she had applied every year for transfer back to Sabah from her superiors from PDRM at Police Hq in Bukit Aman.

 

She learned about her husband’s affair with another woman after her transfer back to Sabah in 2011 via facebook photograph which her husband admitted was true. Initially the husband told her that he will never abandon his family but in 2012 he left his family including a third child who was only 5 months old at that time. He did this by sending her an SMS saying he will not come back to her anymore.

 When asked by the court, the plaintiff believed her husband was angry that she had summoned him to a reconciliation hearing at the Penampang Native Court in August 2012, during which the court had given her husband and lover one month to separate and for him to return to his family. No fines or sogit was imposed then. Instead after the hearing, the husband never came back to his family.

He had given maintenance for his three children for February and March 2014 but afterwards this also stopped completely.

She also declared willingness to accept her husband back if he had returned.

Upon further questioning from the bench, she recognised her husband’s lover who works at a photographic shop and had attended their wedding reception. She tendered 4 photographs as proofs of her husbands affair with the other woman.

 

She pleaded to the court that her husband be made fully responsible for the maintenance of their children and the case to be decided in accordance with the native laws and customs.

 The husband as the accused, shortened the hearing simply by admitting that the testimony of his wife was true. He decline to make any defence when asked by the court but confirmed by signing the court records that he will accept any penalty imposed by the court.

Meanwhile, his 28 year old lover when placed in the dock testified that the baby she is now carrying belongs to the first accused. She accepted the man even though he is married because of his persistence to be with her and that his marriage was on the rocks. She was willing to be judged in accordance with the native adat from Penampang even though she originated from Tuaran.

 

The court then fixed the verdict to be given in June 17.

 

===============

 

Continuing this report, on 17 June 2014, the verdict was read from 9:20 am.

Sitting on the bench were Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun together with newly appointed Native Chief Woritus Paulus and Ketua Kampung Rita John. 

(KAN Woritus from Kg Kituau is the father of the Sugandoi Winner of KDCA 2012 and now a singing diva, Cathy Woritus)

 

Both defendants were fined a total of RM6500 consisting of: -

 

1.  2 karabaus or RM3000 ( rm1500 each as per the Enactment)  as sogit to the wife for "mianu anu" under Part III, 10 (1) of Native Court Enactment 1992/1995.   

 

2.  Another karabau or rm 1500 for the appeasement of the village kg Sugud where the wife is staying, and to be given to the village head for distribution to all the head of household in that kampung

 

3. RM 500 for a pig as sogit to all his three children

 

4.  Court cost rm 1000 to be paid by the husband and rm500 to be paid by the lover.

 

As usual 14 days to pay the fines or face jail sentences.

The two defendants had no comments on the fines, no pleading or appeal meaning the simply accepted the sentence.

 

They can appeal within 60 days to the DO but it is a known fact that if there is no ground for he appeal, the DO who chairs the District Native Court of Appeal will normally enhance the sentence.

 

So case is now concluded.

Case 95/14 Kg Nosoob Baru Man Builds A home for Business without respecting the Ketua Kampung

PENAMPANG. The Native Court here allowed a man from Kg. Nosoob Baru enough time to decide whether to sign, or not, the “Aku Janji” form which is signed by all other native residence of this Native Village Reserve. The man who is claiming his rights to build a two storey house on the plot that was once reserved for his late mother has started concreting works on the site using the service of a building contractor. He claimed he refused to sign the form because the Village Chief and the village security and development committee or JKKK has allocated him only 60 ft by 60 ft as per the village guideline which he deemed as unfair while claiming there are others who have occupied lots that are larger than this guideline.

He also claimed to have stayed in the village for 37 years which is refuted by the JKKK as his mother has stayed there and that he was rarely seen in the village before. He also claimed to have met the District Officer twice to discuss the matter but no conclusion was reached because the village head was not present during the meetings.

Earlier, the Chairman of the JKKK informed the court that on 26^th January 2014 he was informed that concreting works was being carried out on plot in the village without the approval of both JKKK and the village head. At the site he saw the contractor doing the concreting works and when the owner arrived, he informed that the area is a car-park for the whole kampung and for him to conduct some business, the nature of which was not stated. The JKKK chairman then ordered the work stopped until formal approval is obtained and the Aku Janji form signed.  However both the owner and contractor refused the orders. The village head was then informed and on his arrival he too ordered the works to be stopped. The contractor complied on this day however on the following day the works were resumed. Again the JKKK committee members and the village head arrived on site and warned the owner and the contractor that a police report will be made if they continue to disobey the orders.

On 28 January 2014 the owner and contractor continued the works which is deemed illegal and hence both the chairman and his deputy made the police report.  However they were advised by the police to refer to the Native Courts as this is a village matters and they were unable to assist without the orders from the court.

The JKKK and the village head then report the matters to the Native Courts and despite the case still pending, the man continued to carry out the works on site.

There were three calls to appear in court given but still the matter was not settled and the man continued the works without signing the forms which is not respecting both the authority of the village head and the JKKK. Hence the chairman brought the case before the Native Court in order to exercise their rights and powers to protect the rules of village reserves as well as the security and fairness to all the other residence of the village reserve.

In his rebuttal, the man claimed that he has already spent a lot of money and the rules on the forms were unfair to him. This earned him a rebuke from Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun that his action of doing work first and then trying to get approval afterwards is like taking someone’s daughter away and then conducting the engagement process after. He should become a formal member of the village first by signing the form before carrying out any construction works. The village land reserve is meant for poor villagers and that if he has so much money, he should go and buy his own land and do whatever, he said.

Lidaun then read out a document submitted by the JKKK which is the gazette of Kg Nosoob Baru as a Native Village Reserve on 2^nd February 2000.

The conditions to be followed in the village reserves include:

1. The reserve if for the full use of the natives in Nosoob Baru to build their residential houses and necessary additional buildings.

2. The villagers are allowed to follow their traditional industry such as small scale rearing of fowls and farm gardens contained in the village

3. No outsider including natives who are not from the village is allowed to put up buildings without the approval of the Trustees of the Village Reserve. The Trustees consist of the District Officer, District Chief and the Village Chief, and subject to the orders of the Assistant Collector Land Revenue, Penampang. The size of the reserve is 22.4 hectare.

Lidaun then warned the defendant that by refusing to sign the form, he is in fact dismissing himself from the village. He then adjourned the hearing to 15^th April.

Outside the court, other community leaders informed that the maximum penalty that can be imposed to anyone who is disrespectful of the village chief and the JKKK and not signing the form is losing the rights to stay in the village reserve.

NOTE:  This blogger has seen an SMS sent by this man whose name is already reported in Borneo Post on 1st April as PAUL SUINGKI.
The SMS showed that Paul wants a meeting with the village leaders and also sent the same SMS to a developer KINSABINA.

This is very suspicious as what has Kinsabina got to do with village matters as Kinsabina people are NOT natives???

More reports after 15th April.

The hearing was continued on this date as schedule

Ketua Kampung Augustine Anthony was called near the bench to give clarification, not as a witness as he is part of the native court system.

Ketua Kampung of Nosoob Baru informed that the conditions in gazetting the Nosoob Baru land as a native reserves on 2 Feb 2000 are:

1. All residents must be natives, (hence the defendant will have to submit papers to proof his status as a native)

2. All residents are allowed to carry out tradition farming and rearing farm animals

3. Only permanent residents from the village are allowed to put up buildings and not from outside the village and must get the approval of the trustees consisting of Village Chief, district chief and the district officer.

The defendant had asked for a witness for an agreement with his contractor to build a house and the validity of his agreement is only 6 months.

All that is said by the defendant was true. On 26 Jan 2014 we went to the site claimed by him after recieving complaints from the villagers that some installation were carried out outside the lot that was supposed to be his.

I requested the JKKK to conduct a meeting

On 25 Jan 2014, I recieved an SMS from the defendant "untuk perhatian" 1. Kinsabina, 2 JKKK Nosoob Baru and 3. Ketua Kampung

But on 26 Jan recived another SMS from defendant asking for the meeting to be postponed because En Francis Goh is in Tawau and he is the owner of Kinsabina Building.

I have also heard the workers of kinsabina that the building is to be used as quarters for the kinsabina workers.

( defendant interrupted that he is sad with this accusation as his building has nothing to do with them)

Village chief asked the court to evaluate all these SMSes as we have never invited anyone from Kinabina to attend the meeting.

Defendant has yet to sign the aku janji form but we recieved complaints from the villagers that piling machines are already on site.

I went to the site with the JKKK chairman together with his deputy and another committee member in charge of security.

We stopped the workers and asked them from whose orders these works were carried out.

The workers have never heard of the name of the defendant but claims that the works were ordered by kinsabina.

We have obtained his workers card as in exhibit A.

During a mediation on 14-2-2014 we applied for a court order to stop the works because the defendant ignored our orders.

I have called the OCPD Penampang who advised that a court order must be obtained. On 14-2-3014 I was ordered to draft the letter after the native judge has contacted the DO for consent. Letter to be given to defendant.

Copy of letter submitted to court as evindence, the original copy was served on the defendant on 4th March at 5 pm.

I have also recieved a letter from the defendant with content as follows:

"I do not agree with the opinion of the ketua kampung and doubt your authority with your action which is not fair to me. I have been advised by my lawyers to refer the matter to the PPHT, Penampang"

I consider this letter as a threat and disrespecting the status of the village chief.

We ask the discretion of the court that in order to respect the late mother of the defendant, a lot of 60 by 60 ft be given to him only based on the site of her house before, as shown in the exhibits (photos)

That is all from the Ketua Kampung.

Defendant then given the chance to reply.

He said, he is disappointed with the accusation and,

1. I always respected the KK

2. I have even voted for the KK

3. I have plenty of correspondence with the KK

4. There is no connection between me and Kinsabina except that he was given permission to pass through the village but I was proposing to close the access after I have completed the concreting works. However KK have ordered that the access be opened to Kinsabina

( Not mention by what right this defendant has to close the access road in the first place)

Native judge then stated that the issues here are

1. Does the defendant wants to become a member of the village?

2. Would he sign the form or not?

3. Would he agree to the 60 by 60 ft size of the lot?

4. Sino Kadazan, does he have a native certificate or letter of confirmation that he is a native?

Defendant insist he had lived for years in the village but the Ketua Kampung said he was never seen mixing with the locals. Also the Aku Janji form is based on the advice of the DO in order to prevent outsiders from staying and renting houses in the village.

Defendant is told that he is not even in the queue of applicants to build houses in the village due to his mother being a former resident.

Judge asked both JKKK and Ketua Kampung on the sizes of their own lots and both said theirs is smaller than the 60 by 60 ft.

Native judge then commented "dapatkan betis mau paha lagi, selepas itu merayap lagi"

He gave the defendant another 2 minutes to decide whether he wanted to sign the AKU JANJI form. Defendant just kept quiet.

After 2 minutes the judge said since the defendant refuse to accept the conditions of the village reserve and refusal to accept the form, then by his own action he has now lost all the rights to be a member of the village.

Therefore this Native Court will record that this is what he wants.

Case Closed.

CASE 328/13 - INDON Car Salesman and Ex Immigrant made a young girl pregnant

17 Dec 2013

Penampang. The native court here lectured a father of three on how to prevent his children from falling into trouble at an early age.

Native Chief Andrew S. Lidaun who presided on the case said he should always be with his children, give them religious education, know and control where they go and prohibit them from going out at night.

Lidaun was prompted after the man who filed a case against a Timorese for making his underaged eldest daughter pregnant, failed to answer his question on what he would do to prevent the same thing from befalling on his two other daughters.

The father who works as a Purchasing Officer, informed the court that he had allowed his only daughter from his first wife to stay with his younger sister so that she can work at a cybercafe owned by the sister.

He admitted contacting his daughter at an average of once a month, which Lidaun consider as grossly insufficient.

After the death of his first wife, he married again at Sacred Heart Church in 2008 and his second wife gave the other two children.

Lidaun also chided him for mixing up the important dates in his testimony and had to refer to his eldest daughter who was present in court for the correct dates. The father also claimed that he never met or called

the man responsible for his daughter's pregnancy because he is of a different race and religion while his daughter is not ready to start a family. After being told by the daughter of the identity of the man, he made

a police report and then got endorsement by the District Officer for the case to be tried in the Native Court and only then he is meeting face to face with him. The daughter gave birth to a female child just two days before the court hearing and both father and daughter has decided to gave away the baby for adoption.

He strongly opposed the possibility of the man marrying his daughter and asked the court to punish him in accordance with the customs and traditions of the Kadazan Dusun from Penampang.

In response, the accused Timorese admitted he was the one responsible for the girl giving birth on the the date as stated in court. He was ready to be punished in accordance with the offence he has committed

and will not press for marriage due to difference in religion. Earlier he had informed the court that he has a Malaysian identity card after staying in Sabah for a long time and his father has the same. He works as a car dealer at Kg. Air, Kota Kinabalu.

Lidaun adjourned the case until next year after seing the daughter who has just recently gave birth, shivering in the cold airconditioned court room.

Outside the courtroom was a different scene. The Timorese was seen looking for the girl saying he want to wish her a happy birthday which will be in two days time.

 

========================

 

January 15 2014

Penampang. Half a dozen relatives of a 19 year old girl briefly applauded at the end of a native court hearing when the girl swore before Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun that she will never repeat the blunder of allowing herself to be made pregnant by an irresponsible male.

She was testifying as the second defendant in a case where she gave birth to a baby girl last year after a brief liaison with a young Indonesian male with a Malaysian IC.

She agreed with all the testimonies by her father that was made in December last year and confirmed she does not want to be married at present. She informed that the baby girl is being cared for by the Sisters at a Convent awaiting adoption because the man who made her pregnant does not want to accept the out-of-wedlock baby. The first defendant who is a moslem, was not present in the court during the hearing.

When asked by the court why she did not take care of herself and protected her dignity, she replied that she was duped by sweet words and promises when she was taken out for a date. Strangely, the girl could not suppress a smile when Lidaun rebuked her for choosing foreigners instead of her own kind and perhaps go after those with high position and a sense of responsibility.

At the beginning of the hearing, Lidaun chided both the father and daughter for arriving nearly one hour late saying that the court does not wait those who seek the services of the court. They should be ready before the set time of 9 am and should anticipate whatever causes of delays, traffic jams, floods and anything else.

He then adjourned the hearing to 18th February in order to summon the first defendant.

==========================================

18 February 2014 

Penampang. The native court here convicted and fined a 24 year old car dealer a total sum of RM5500 – made up of a “sogit” of two water buffaloes monetised as RM3000 and another head of water buffalo for “kepanasan kampung” or appeasement of the village which is the actual cost of the buffalo in Penampang District worth RM2500. In addition court cost of RM1500 was imposed of which RM 700 must be paid by the young woman as second defendant.

District chief Christopher Mojungkim who handed down the verdict together with native chief Andrew Lidaun and village chief Augustine Anthony made the order under the Native Court Enactment 1992, Part III 10(1), for “mianu-anu”.

According to the facts of the case, the father of the 18 year old woman filed the case against the individual who is a Bugis Muslim for sweet talking his daughter to go out with him and then impregnating her resulting in the birth of a baby girl on 14 Dec 2013. The baby was given up for adoption via a welfare body in Likas without any objection from the first defendant.

The court took into consideration that both the man and the young woman have admitted in their testimonies of consensual affair resulting in the birth of the baby and so the woman became the second defendant in the native court. However the man was warned that if the same offence is repeated, the penalties will be doubled. All the fines must be paid within 14 days but he can appeal within 60 days. However, the court also pointed out that since he had pleaded guilty during the proceedings, there would be no logic in appealing. He was also told that if he wants to marry the girl, he must follow the customary adat. The plaintiff responded that any such proposal is out of the question because of different race and religion.

After the verdict was read, the first defendant appealed for a lighter fine and the panel granted a reduction in the court cost of RM300 only to both the first and second defendant but the rest of the fines were final because the offence was deemed very serious.

The man again pleaded to the court that he wish to see the baby of which he would need the assistance of the woman and his family. On this the plaintiff informed the court that he has accepted the decisions of the court and will not want to deal with him at all.

After the panel of judges have left the courtroom, the plaintiff, his daughter and 4 family members left the court in haste.

END....

FOLLOW THE NATIVE ADAT, SAYS THE NATIVE COURT OF APPEAL KOTA KINABALU, ON INHERITED LAND

17-3-2014

KOTA KINABALU. The Native Court of Appeal here dismissed an appeal against the judgement of the Kota Kinabalu District Native Court based on the principle that inherited land shall be passed on to descendant following the customary adat, where the land owned by the father will be inherited by sons and that of the mother to the daughters as per the accepted adat of the district.

The Native Court of Appeal was presided by Justice Tan Sri Richard Malanjum who is also the Chief Judge of Sabah and Sarawak, and assisted by Native Chief Adrian Sikawah from Penampang and Matsah Sahat from Kota Kinabalu.

The case involved a claim by a man for a share of a land that belongs to his mother. His late father has written a simple will witnessed by a village head stating that his mothers share of the land shall go to him. Based on this, the man made a claim at the native court against his niece (daughter of his sister) who had inherited the said land via Jadual 3 process of the native court.

The learned judges also ruled that even if there is a will, it shall also comply with the customary adat of the district to be effective. The appeal case was disposed within half an hour which affirmed the decision of both the lower courts namely the Native Court and the District Native Courts.

Earlier, the respondent who was represented by a lawyer registered with the Native Court of Appeal made a preliminary objection that the appeal was submitted beyond the 60 days mandated by the Native Court Enactment 1992. However, upon checking all the documents and finding the date on which the judgement of the Kota Kinabalu District Native Court was read was on 5^th September 2013, but the document was marked as 25^th July 2013, the objection was over-ruled. However, the standards of the documentations submitted prompted Malanjum to comment that the lower native courts still require lots of training. He also ticked the lawyer for presenting her case in legalise style when the hearing in the Native Court of Appeal is very similar to the Native Court.

Meanwhile, the man who is the Appellant was able to present his case without the assistance of a counsel.

Case No. 75/2013 - FILIPINA INSULTS THE NATIVE COURT

18-3-2014

PENAMPANG. The Native Court here ordered a warrant of arrest for a 48 year old container-truck driver for failing to appear in court a total of five times. Four letters were issued to him to appear in chamber while the last was a legal summon to appear in the open native court and all five documents were signed acknowledging as received. He even answered a phone call saying he is on his way to appear in a previous chamber hearing, but never arrived.

Native Chief Andrew S Lidaun and Village Chiefs Rita John and Michael Bejuet made the unanimous decision in court when only the plaintiff, the 46 year old wife of the truck driver and six out of seven of his children were present. The husband and his female companion were absent.

Speaking from the bench, Lidaun even said that the Native Courts should be allowed to imprison in the same way as other courts, any offender who is blatantly in contempt of court as well as wasting the courts’ time and resources.

Earlier, the wife who came from Kg Pogunon Penampang testified that she filed the case in the native court because she has sufficient proofs her husband is having a secret affair with a Filipina only known as Jariah. (which can be a fake name)

She discovered her number from the handphone of her husband about 2 years ago and when called, she said that she had nothing to do with her husband as she is married to another. Her husband also denied anything on being confronted.

However, when the number was called again after some time, the same Filipina answered that “tiada lagi hubungan kami” ( we no longer have any relation – implying there was before)

All these happened when the husband was staying at the workers’quarters at Kg Kitobu, Inanam for the last 2 years.

The husband used to returned to their family home at Kg Kinuta, Papar regularly, however this became less and less of which he cited the cost of transport fuel as the excuse. The amount of expenses he sent home also became less and insufficient for the 5 children still staying with the mother. One daughter who is now studying at UiTM is not given any financial assistance. He even did not come home for a stretch of 6 months.

Then the Filipina started sending the wife many digital photos of herself in romantic pose with her husband. Eight of the clearest photographs were downloaded and printed by the wife and submitted to the court as evidence. Lidaun held up the photographs for everyone in court to see, while commenting that this is no longer a secret affair but a “hubungan terbuka” invoking laughter all around!

This was followed by daring and abusive handphone calls and SMS by the Filipina that were quoted such as “mana sudah mahkamah taih kau ? “ ( where is your #*$% native court) and “you have been cheated, all your husband’s money now goes to me”.

In conclusion, the wife begged the court, if possible, to jail and refer to immigration the Filipina for causing trouble to her family and investigate the misbehaviour of her husband and punish accordingly. She maintained devotion to the husband only because he is still the father of all her children present in court and will not give up because she has a duty to her big family.

The court was adjourned for follow up actions by the police.

VERDICT For Case 332/13 - Not honouring the promise to engage daughter, yet she already given birth to a baby

Case Title in Bahasa :  Tidak menunaikan janji untuk pertunangan tetapi anak perempuan sudah melahirkan anak

Plaintiff:  Mum of girl  (Melinda)
Defendant 1:  Salleh b Banjar, 21 Cloth Seller (Kibabaig)
Def 2.  :  21 y.o.  daughter

Facts of case:
1.  Daughter gave birth to a baby after staying together with D1 for one year and not married, not even engaged as previously promised by the defendant.
2.  Salleh definitely was responsible for the pregnancy
3.  The father had proposed for the man to conduct engagement process but he reneged on his promise
4.  The village chief of Duvanson was well aware of this case
5.  Has violated the Native Customary enactment 1992/1995
6.  On 22 July 2013, a police report was made at Penampang where he promised to carry out the engagement and also not to disturb the girl until then.  Instead not only did he dishonour the promise but also threatened the girl to go away from home and stay with him.

From the 1st defendant's own statement:
1.  He accepted the girl with open heart (whatever that means)
2.  Admit bringing her out of her home without consent of the parents or engagement
3.  Causing the birth of a child before bethrotal (nikah)
4.  Admission of violating the native customs and ready to accept the penalty

From the 2nd defendant ( the girl)  Emelina

1.  All accusations by her mother are true
2.  Did not deny having stayed at the house of the accused
3.  Ready to accept the appropriate penalty

In summary, the man's promised to marry was dishonoured instead committed threat to force girl to stay with him.
First hearing was held on 19 Nov 2013.

VERDICT:  Also in accordance to the order of the Chief Judge or the District Chief,  all offences will incur a penalty.

Under Part III-10(1) of the said enactment

1.  2 water buffaloes  RM 3000
2.  1 water buffalo for the kampung or RM 1500
3.  Court cost for offending the native adat: RM1500 (700 to be paid by the girl as second defendant)
TOTAL:  RM 6000

Under Part IV 21 (1)  taking a daughter out without the consent of parents
 1.  Pay 2 water buffaloes or RM 3000.

Grand total of fines  RM9000.00  ( no leniency or reductions )

Pay all fines to the Native court within 14 days or face 12 months jail, 6 months from each of the sections.

2.  If the offences is still repeated, the next fine will be doubled. He can appeal within 60 days however the court orders that the daughter is to return to her family immediately after the verdict.

If the man still wants the girl, must pay all the fines first they conduct a proper wedding ceremony complete with Sumazau..  and gongs. etc.

THE GAVEL WAS STRUCK by the presiding judge.

After the hearing was over the accused simply talk with the girl and went out of the room fast as if he was ready to challenge and disobey the orders.
Totally no respect to the court at all.

Case 333/13 - Menuntut Blanja Anak dan Maruah kerana Lelaki Sudah Khawin

First hearing date: 11-12-2013

Plaintiff:  Housewife (LL) originally from Kg Kibunut

Defendant 1: Crane Operator ( S A)
Defendant 2: Housekeeping Supervisor Segama Hotel ( L L)

Both defendants in the dock wearing purple dress

Plaintiff Testimony:

( Native Chief chided plaintiff for writing in complaint letter that she is fed up being called to court 3 times but still no completion to her case, because the court seems to be accused of not doing their job.

23 June 2013 - couselling due family problem
29 May 2013 - councelling but both parties did not carry out advice
31 August 2013 - There was an application for divorce but the Native Court cannot carry this out since they married in Church and registered with JPN.
Only the high court can do that by first engaging lawyers.)

Housewife in witness box said she summon her husband because he had married another woman called L. L.
I recognise this woman because she came to our house during a birthday party of our grandchild. She came with friends and cousins of my husbuan in 2011.
The Ketua Kampung KK Limus informed her by phone that her husband and the woman had married in Nov 2013. ( Judge again chided her for not bringing her own proofs such as factual dates)

Judge asked do you know why he married again? She answered, "I don't know, maybe I am too old for him".
Before this we lived as husband and wife under the same roof and bedroom.
Judge ask, were you living like normal husband and wife?  she could not answer.

She complaint that now husband does not give any more expenses and now she looks after her own livelihood for about a year. We had 7 children, one is still at school. The rest have their own family to look after, only one left who gives her some food and drink.
The one still studying at Perak to become a nurse and she is given some support after being asked.
Judge ask what she meant as "maruah sebagai esteri" and she submitted a document of claim but the Judge stated that these claims can only be made after they have formally divorced.  She was again chided that she has to ask first to be given whatever she wanted but seemed to have kept quiet in the past.

( housewife signed the statement)

Defendant 1 testimony as heard verbatim:

The accusation that we have married is rather not true. He intended to marry the other woman but have not got letter with witnesses.
Judge chided him, I have told you to get a divorce first 3 times before you can marry again. Defendant 1 replied that she asked the wife for a divorce but she refused.
He is now staying with the other woman but the Karabau has not been slaughtered yet ! And he also did not follow the Native court advive to apply for a divorce at the high court.

At the moment they want to live together like husband and wife so the allegation by the wife that we are married is not true.

So judge ask him, are you having a secret affair or hubungan sulit and the defendant said NO !

Judge said there is only two choice, either you are married or hubungan sulit (secret affair) and there is no such thing as hubungan terbuka (open affairs) otherwise all the other women can be subjected to be opened everywhere !!
( court suppressed or giggle at this joke)

Hence the Judge postponed the case to 7 Jan 2014 for the husband to choose between ..
1. Having married or second wife, or
2. Having a secret affair ( hubungan sulit)

(The problem of course is that whichever the husband chooses, the penalty is still high..  3 buffaloes worth !!)

=====

On 7 Jan 2013,  all three were now wearing purple shirts.

This time the first defendant has to continue his defence in the witness box.

The question from the judge was, "have they got married yet"?
Judge reminded him that they got married at St Michael's Church and no other authority will give another certificate of marriage for getting married a second time, so they will get married on their own.

Defendant statement was then:
"The accusation of my wife that I have got married again is true. This is because the family of the other woman wants us to get married even though I am still legally married to the first wife. We held a simple reception but no village chief attended, we made up our own ceremony, no buffalo was slaughtered, bought beef enough for the party.

JKK Chairman have no power to certify any marriage. No sogit was produced and no other animals was slaughtered for the kampung ceremony.

Judge asked, are you still going to live with your girlfriend?
Defendant answered that he still want to be with her because the old wife don't want him anymore and I have asked for a divorce but she refused.
(this was in contradiction with wife's previous testimony)

All these time, my wife refused to accept me as a husband but when I went to live with the other woman, she summoned me to the Native Court.
I will accept the penalty for living with the other woman.

( Judge commented that the native court is not a punitive court but set up based on our forefather's traditions and customs to solve people's problem, sometimes with counselling of the parties involved and punitive action taken as last resort)

Judge called the second defendant into the witness box for her statement to be taken.

She agreed with the first defendant that they are living together and the fact is true.
She asked the court why for one whole year they were living together, the wife never came to look for her or her husband then. Only now she summon in this court.
That was all her statement was and signed the statement records.

The judge then adjourned the hearing for the verdict on 4th February 2014.

VERDICT ON 4TH FEB AT ABOUT 10 AM, THE SECOND VERDICT READ FOR THE DAY.

Native Chief Andrew SL presiding assisted by two village chiefs or ketua kampongs, RJ and SK

Summary of facts noted by the judges
From Plaintiff.
1.  Husband has got married again as informed by the ketua kampung who investigated and found them living together
2. Before this plaintiff and husband stayed in the same house together
3. 1 year not giving any maintenance to the wife
4.  The rest of the kids are working
5. Husband pays for one kid who is still studying at semenanjung
6.  plaintiff is claiming sogit as per native customary law.

from Defendant 1.
1. Family of the other woman chided them for living together without a ceremony/ reception.
2.  So he held a reception according to his own made up adat, without a buffalo for sogit
3.  There was no village chief present
4.  Admitted that the "kenduri" was not valid
5.  Stated he was willing to be punished as per native adat
6.  Stated that his wife did not want his as a husband and do not want to divore him either, but when he went to stay with the other woman, sued him in native court.

from defendant 2.
1. Admitted that they were living together as per the defendant 1 testimony. And the marriage not valid, willing to submit to the adat as per her actions.

Summary:
There was a clear admission by both defendants
Husband still got a family, wife and 7 children. If he wanted to marry again he should divorce first wife and do the proper process according to the native adat, so he has clearly offendend the Native Adat Enactment.

Penalty:  Under Part 3- 10(1) "mianu-anu"
1.  Pay 2 "kerabaus" or rm3000 to the aggrieve party (plaintiff)
2.  Pay kepanasan kampung or appeasement to the village another kerabau.
3.  Court cost for not respecting the Native adat RM1500 (700 to be paid by 2nd defendant)
4.  Every children to be given sogit of one pig or rm 500 each.
TOTAL:  RM9500.00
Payment to native court within 14 days or face 6 months jail, or appeal to District Native court under the DO within 60 days.
However if the offence is repeated and another case filed, automatically the total sogit will be doubled.
On top of that, the court ORDERS the man to return to his family immediately after the verdict while the other woman is still pretty and available can find another eligible male.. !!!

The first defendant will not appeal but beg for leniency on the fines.
So the panel of judges  considered and reduce one buffalo to calf buffalo costing rm750, and all the pigs to piglets worth RM 300 each.
Total reduction of fines = rm750 + rm200 x 7 = rm 2150.00 to be paid in 14 days.

CASE CLOSED:  Gavel on bench struck.
==========
After the judges have left the courtroom, one young daughter was seen weeping silently at the back of the courtroom.

Lesson learnt: 7 children and still want another woman?  Sure must learn to control the urge mah otherwise the children will suffer the shame.
At the same time the fine is very very hefty and no way you can avoid unless you wanna go to jail for 6 months.
Income is difficult with the rising cost of living so better do something about your libido, better kill it when you grow older.  Better learn to do something in your free time.

Case 291/13 - Fiancee is having an affair with another man - THE SEVENTH HEAVEN CASE

Case of a fiancee who loves the song "Langit ke tujuh"

This was previously posted on 12/11/2013 but another thread is started because this is going to be a long long story. First heard by the native court on the same date but the judge postpone the hearing until 6 January 2014 because the plaintiff failed to turn up at that time.

Plaintiff: DPB - Contractor cum businessman from Sugud

First Defendant: FEL - part time lecturer, part time student

2nd defendant:  JM - businessman
( 2nd def did not attend court hearing but send a letter to the Native chief citing prior appointment but requested the hearing to continue.)

Official case title:  Tunang saya ada hubungan sulit dengan lelaki lain.

Plaintiff testimony:
==============

First defendant and I were engaged on 22 Oct 2006, witnessed by one Ketua Kampung and two Wakil Ketua Anak Negeri.
Scene One:
On 9 April 2013 at KKIAirport at about 10 to 10.30 am, I saw with my own eyes by chance my fiancee and 2nd defendant sitting at a McDonald restaurant at a corner, just the two of them together. Upon seeing, I SMS her HP asking why he is sitting with JM?
She answered that she is doing a research or thesis on Kadazan Dusun Wedding customs and the man is her so-called advisor. By right i am the fiancee and she should ask me. At that time I believed her because whe was doing her thesis and I just accepted being a positive person. Did not approached them because at that time was rather shy and was about 30 ft away.

Scene no. 2:
On 4th July 2013 my schoolmate CA called my HP and want to tell me in person  about my fiancee. She called me to a reunion party of old friends. She told me that all these while, my fiancee has not been faithful to me. She decided to show me conversation between my fianccee and cousin that she has been busy with other men.  There are 13 pages of SMS messages circulating amongst friends but No. 3 is the one to be submitted.

Scene No. 3:
On 16th Aug 2013, about 11.45 to 12.30 midnight again JM and my fiancee was partying at Blue 7 club at Nosoob Kobusak Jln Penampang. My younger brother AB and his friends EP and TBP (also the niece of fiancee) saw them there. At that time, I was at home bu my brother called me to tell that my fiancee is there with the man and so I asked my brother to take a photo. My question, is this a place suitable for asking advice on wedding traditions and cultures of the KDM?
The photos were not clear, many attempts but the place was dim. They realised that they were being observed and taking pics, so they went out of the back door and seen by friends as holding hands and entering their car, a Ninja Super King coloured white. The witnesses were sure owned by JM.

Scene no 4:
Late Aug 2013, a friend BS and I were invited to a birthday party of one business friend Sheila, a land broker who informs me about available land for purchasing.
We entered the Club Bonjur at Taman Hilltop Lintas Luyang.
At about 10 pm I booked a table and heard someone singing "Langit Ketujuh" (a favourite of my fiancee) and seemed to recognise the voice.
True enough when I investigated, I found my fianccee flirting with JM while singing the song (berkambai kambai sambil menyanyi). This went on for 30 minutes so I felt uneasy. So I instructed the waiter to call her to my table.  She was shocked to see me there. I wanted to ask her lots of questions but she did not turn up to my table. JM saw me and pretended to go to another table as if nothing has happened to cover up the matter. 15 min later JM with out of the backdoor. I believe he has many GFs and my fiancee seemed to be just one of  them.
She stood there talking to a lady, did not come to my table and 15 minutes later she went to the toilet and after coming out she  immediately went out of the backdoor.
When I chased after her asking her to stop and calling JM at the same time.
I said, is this JM, you are my uncle, why are you disturbing my fiancee?  He answered, I don't know what you are talking about and I dont know any one named  F.
(JM father and my grand father are first cousins so JM is my uncle)
I said to him that night, " you fucking bastard" because I was very furious by his actions.  " I will sue you and F at the Native Courts. Then I hung up because I dont want to waste my time. My fiancee just stood in front of me and I said in a loud voice, "you fucking bitch" (anjing betina?)
She did not utter a single world.  I also said, "you are a good actress and this is what you have been doing behind me for the past seven years with JM, the so-called bloody millionaire.  You can get out of my life, you have no self respect."

After that I went back to the club. No words to describe how I felt because I was a bit drunk. But I composed myself, did not do anything bad or stupid. I prayed that I would not do such thing for a long time. When I went back to my table, Sheila asked me why I did not join with F and friends at that time. I said, one of them was my friend and I did not want anything bad to happen.

We have been engaged for 7 years, the engagement time was supposed to be only 2 years as per agreement but wedding kept being postponed because she wants to pursue a master degree, and so it stands until today after 7 years. We did not come back to the people who conducted the engagement because I respected her wish to further study at University Technology Malaysia for 2 years.

I have already paid the engagement cost berian and even supported her studies morally and financially to about RM18,000.
I could not afford to support her so I used my land as collateral for a loan with Yayasan Sabah. The proof is with the fiancee.

In order to get the degree and graduations cost must be paid and as a fiance, I felt responsible because her family cannot assist financially.
After getting a master degree, I discussed with her about wedding but there was no answer. Now she is saying seh wants to take a PhD in KDM wedding cultures and now in the 2nd year of the course which will take 6 years.
So now the marriage is hunged with many excuses until now.
A few times I gave her a JPN form but nothing ever happened. Along the way sheila was shocked and felt guilty that JM and F were invited and caused the problem and they were her friends too.

For 7 years was trying to get married but all the time so many obstacle. I still sayang her despite all that had happened as she is my fiancee.

But with all the evidence, now I wish to end the engagement after the Native court have concluded the case.  Based on the additional ticket evidence, she went to Penang on 24 July 2013 together with JM without my knowledge as a fiancee. On 7 December 2013 also went together to KL with flight KK513.  With Exhibits 1 to 6 I have decided to take action at this navite court in accordance with the customs and traditions of the natives of Penampang District.
The court was adjourned at 11.45 am and the next session to be called by the court and also to summon the 2nd defendant.

CONTINUATION HEARING ON 12 FEB 2014 AT 9:30 AM

2nd Defendant was present:

Panel of Judges now included the District Chief while one Village Head step down to the Court official bench.

Since the 2nd defendant was not present in the first hearing, the court read out the record of testimony by the plaintiff as shown above, except there was one additon not record previously.
The Native Chief also informed that a police report was made by the plaintiff and referred to the DO who gave the green light for the case to be heard in the native court.

After the reading was completed, the 1st defendant was then called to the witness box and sworn in.

When asked by the court on the allegation by the fiance, she said she understood all the charges, most were "terpesong" ( literally means deviated) which the judge recorded as not true, only a bit was correct.

So then the panel asked her to touch on all those she considered as terspesong, leaving out the allegations which she admits as true.
She started saying that she has to start from the beginning like from 2005.

Judge says that she should focus on the incidents such as at KLIA, and the rest and say why it is not true, but she insisted that there are relevance to the past events.
(at this juncture 2nd defendant interupted that she should be allowed to make her statement otherwise it is not fair, because previous statement said everything including the word "millionaire".)

After the interruption was stopped by the panel she immediately stated that she pleads not guilty on the charges of secret affairs.
Judge says they are not saying if she is guilty or not, the present process is simply investigating the facts of the plaintiffs testimoney.

So she started explaing the incident on KLIA on 9 th April 2013 that she was working as a part time lecturer and there is an appointment letter from JBorneo company appointing her as an IT consultant and Research Assistant related to her research on her thesis.
She was ordered by her employer to send a file to KL and she needed to discuss about the tradional wedding process and interview those getting married with the traditional way.
I was contacted by the fiance by SMS and did not talk to him in person as there is no law to say I must speak to a fiance.
He is short tempered and his SMS asked " why are you with somebody's husband"

This was as far as her testimony has reached when 2nd defendant loudly interrupted the proceeding saying the court sounds one -sided and if this is the way the court is conducted, I might as well go home, and started unlocking the latch of the docks.

He was told to be silent while the witness was still giving testimony and he will be aloud to speak once he entered the witness box.

The plaintiff who was sitting outside the box and in the middle of the court now, also stood up to ask the court that only the issues of the incidents in 2013 is the subject of the court and not anything in the past 7 years.

At this 2nd defendant got more angry saying that guy is allowed to speak outside the witness box and raise his voice further.

The hearing looked like going out of control but the Presiding District Chief stopped the hearing and warned that those who do not respect the court can be jailed up to 24 months and fined RM5000 or both for contempt of court.

Since the tension in the court appears to be hot, the panel decided to adjourn the hearing to a later date which was not annnounced.


( The continuation of this case is not known since the panel is deciding if any action be taken against the 2nd defendant for interrupting the court proceedings)

PROCEEDINGS CONTINUED ON 12 JUNE 2014.
No action was taken against the 2nd defendent for clearly being in contempt of court last time. Instead this time both 1st and 2nd defendant did not turn up to court by 9:30 am.

Sitting on the Bench were newly appointed District Chief OKK Bryan Lojingon and assisted by two senior Native Chiefs, Andrew and Marcus.

By 9.45, the court had made 3 formal calls for the defendants to be present in court and a Ketua Kampung, Rita J as a court official went out of the court 3 times to check if the defendants have arrived outside the court, but she came back reporting that they are not around.

Plaintiff in the witness box stood up to protest that the 2nd defendant has been in contempt three times in the past and requested the court for action.
The Bench replied that the court in nature is lenient and may only take action if the defendants again failed to turn up on the next hearing to be fixed.  The hearing was then adjourned.

Outside the court, the parents of the defendant were clearly disappointed with the leniency of the court.
The said that the defendant were in contempt of court, wasting everyone's time and the court should have taken actions earlier.
The defendants should act like gentlemen and come to court, better still admit their guilt and thus the case can be settled soon.
Then both the parties can go on their way to marry other persons of their choice instead of the 7 year engagement which cannot proceed nor can be ended amicably.

The courts and the defendants are certainly unfair to my son, they said.

Next date of hearing still UNKNOWN.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

UPDATE.  29 jun 2015

Sometimes in mid of this month 17 or 18,  I passed by the native court and met the parents of the plaintiff.

They told me the fiancé and fiancée are in the chamber to settle officially their engagement, meaning end the engagement amicably in chamber.

Since it was now a chamber case, member of public are not allowed but the parents said the case has been delayed perhaps purposely by the second defendant so in other words he has escaped the court using the methods of procrastination.

There was never a letter from the State Attorney regarding the temporary stopping of the proceedings in court.
Hence instead of keeping the case hanging indefinitely, the couple decided to end the engagement after now more than 8 years.

According to whispers, the settlement is simple.

1.  All berian and the ring are returned.
2.  She has to pay about rm16 K of money spent on her education by instalment of 2k per month.
3. According to the native enactment, if it is the fiancé who ends the engagement, then their is a sogit of 2 karabaus.

The parents of the groom insisted on LIVE buffalo meaning that will cost RM 2500 each, the Penampang cost of a buffalo.

THE SEVENTH HEAVEN CASE THUS ENDETH.