By Lian Cheng
KUCHING, Nov 19: Former Democratic Action Party (DAP) Sarawak vice president Wong King Wei has described DAP Sarawak as the “Chong Dynasty” led by its chief Chong Chieng Jen in court yesterday as things began to heat up between the two former colleagues.
Wong, who is Padungan incumbent, has been testifying in the Kuching High Court for the plaintiff in the defamation case brought about by Sarawak Chinese Federation president Dato Richard Wee against Chong’s special assistant Michael Kong yesterday and today via teleconferencing.
Wee filed a defamation suit against Kong over an alleged defamatory statement on social media which was authored and published by Kong on July 21, 2020 on his Facebook page.
Wee was represented by counsels Shankar Ram Asnani, Russell Lim and Yu Ying Ying while Kong was represented by his counsels Chong and Sim Kiat Leng.
In today’s morning session trial which was conducted via Zoom platform, Wong affirmed that when he referring to the ‘Chong Dynasty’, he was referring to Chong and his family members during Chong’s questioning.
For that, Chong raised the fact that among the five DAP Sarawak incumbents and six DAP MPs, none were his family members.
Wong, however, did not back off but stated that he was not referring to the elected representatives but posts in office when Chong was former Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Deputy Minister during the 22 months of the former Pakatan Harapan adminstration.
“There is none (elected representatives from Chong’s family) but there was (a) family member of Chong involved in a government agency and the office of deputy minister in Putrajaya whom Chong had caused and pushed to be appointed. And in the (internal) party, Chong is very influential and powerful,” said Wong.
Wong pointed out that Chong’s brother-in-law, Kiung Teck Chang, was then part of the staff of Chong’s office in Putrajaya and another person by the name Stanley (Liew), who is Chong’s cousin-in-law of was also appointed as a chairman of a government agency.
When Chong pressed for more information with regards to Wong’s knowledge on Kiung’s position, Wong remained vague.
“I did try to ask but it was kept a secret from me. What I had observed (was that) the said Mr Kiung Teck Chang had stationed himself in the office of deputy minister with a private room given to him for his usage and that bothered me when I knew Kiung Teck Chang was having full time job (by himself) and it seemed that he had been involved in deputy minister office (in) full time after Chong Chieng Jen was appointed as deputy minister,” said Wong.
In response, Chong stated that Kiung’s position was not appointed which Wong denied knowledge of, but continued to insist that Kiung was heavily involved in the administrative activities of the deputy minister office.
On Liew’s appointment, Chong stated that Lieu was appointed the director of the Malaysia Pepper Board and was recruited through a recruitment advertisement where there were interviews conducted before the official engagement.
Chong also challenged Wong’s statement by asking Wong to state the number of DAP Sarawak State committee members and those numbers connected to Chong’s family.
“Apart from Chong Chieng Jen, his brother-in-law Kiung Teck Chang is one of the State committee members with the the father of Chong Chieng Jen, Chong Siew Chiang, (who) is the advisor of the State committee,” answered Wong.
Due to time constraints, following that, Chong could only put forth his last four questions against Wong, quoted verbatim below:
Chong: There was no such Chong Dynasty in Sarawak DAP. Do you agree?
Wong: I disagree.
Chong: There is also no malice in the defendant’s FB post against the plaintiff. Do you agree?
Wong: I disagree.
Chong: Overall what you said in your testimony against the DAP and Chong Chieng Jen are not true.
Wong: I disagree.
Chong: I put it to you that your testimony is made with the intent to run down DAP and help SUPP (Sarawak United Peoples’ Party) with the coming election, thus it is an abuse of the process of the court.
Wong: This is the utmost dirty allegation and I disagree.
— DayakDaily
