KOTA KINABALU: UNDER cross-examination by Shim, Yong said as non-Exec Chairman he had no authority to sign cheques and enter into agreements or transactions with third party on behalf or for Warisan Harta.

His role was only to chairman the Board of Directors meeting which the company notify him.

He said he was also not entitled to an office, secretary or driver and that he has no authority to run the management and the affairs of Warisan Harta when holding the post.

He then described the way the meeting was conducted and said members of the Board of Directors were appointed at the time of his predecessor.

Earlier, Yong's counsel Shim said Yee singled out Yong, who was the then Chief Minister, and issued a number of statements attacking him.

The two press statements by Yee were dated Dec 27 and 31, 1999 while the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) report was on Dec 30, 1997.

He contended that Yee who is a Deputy President in PBS alleged impropriety and "a hidden agenda and motive" in Yong's conduct as non-Exec Chairman of Warisan in the statements.

Shim said Yong was only objecting to the statements and report issued by Yee and "is not objecting to Yee's freedom of expression which in any event is subject to the laws of defamation in the country".

"Therefore, whether the Defendant was discharging his duty as a Member of Parliament is totally irrelevant here. His freedom of speech does not give him the licence to defame the Plaintiff," said Shim.

After the lunch break, Justice Sulong allowed the Defendant's application for leave to amend paragraph 4C and 5C by inserting the word "other" so that it would read as "Datuk Yong Teck Lee is obliged to tell us whether there is any OTHER hidden agenda or motives for the basis of the acquisition of the NBT shares".

After both counsels, with Raymond Szetu as leading counsel for Yee, presented their arguments, Justice Sulong ruled that the particular statement was not an allegation but "only a pure question".

Szetu had earlier said: "Our defence is not there are hidden agenda, we were merely asking the question as to whether the Plaintiff knew of any other agendas".

"If the Plaintiff in his attempt to show that there was open, transparent and normal business transactions then the Defence may elect to cross-examine him to discredit his contention," said Szetu.

The trial was adjourned at 4.35pm and Justice Sulong set 9:30am to continue the hearing today. Shim said he would be calling eight witnesses to testify.