Membina keterangan: pemeriksaan utama sebagai titik permulaan
List of Authors
  • Noraini Ibrahim

Keyword
  • keterangan, pemeriksaan utama, pemeriksaan balas, saksi, sistem adversari

Abstract
  • Ciri utama sistem adversari yang diamalkan di mahkamah di Malaysia ialah pemerolehan keterangan melalui satu wacana proses pemeriksaan lisan. Proses ini melibatkan tiga jenis pemeriksaan. Pemeriksaan utama dikendalikan oleh pihak pemanggil, manakala pemeriksaan balas dilakukan oleh pihak lawan. Jika perlu, pemeriksaan semula diadakan oleh pihak pemanggil untuk ‘membetulkan’ keterangan yang rapuh hasil dari pemeriksaan balas pihak lawan. Pemeriksaan para saksi yang dipanggil ke mahkamah dijalankan dalam bentuk soal-jawab sesuai dengan prosedur undang-undang. Soalan diberikan oleh peguam dan jawapan disempurnakan oleh saksi. Justeru itu saksi terpilih yang dipanggil akan membantu membina dan seterusnya mengukuhkan versi pihak pemanggil melalui beberapa strategi. Makalah ini yang berteraskan satu kajian kes jenayah di Mahkamah Tinggi Jenayah 1 Kuala Lumpur, akan menggaris dan membincang beberapa strategi yang digunakan oleh peguam dalam pemeriksaan utama saksi pakar dalam usaha membina satu versi naratif yang boleh dipercayai.

Reference
  • Atkinson J.M. & P. Drew. 1979. Order in court. Atlantic Highlands, N. J.: Humanities Press.
    Atkinson J.M. & P. Drew (Pnyt.) 1984. Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Aust, P.J. 2000 Attorney/witness stories in the Courtroom: Analyzing the collaborative dialogue of direct examination. Communication Law Review. 4. (Atas talian). www.uark.edu/depts/comminfo/CLR/index.html. (22 November 2001).
    Conley, J. M. & W. M. O’Barr. 1990. Rules versus relationships: The ethnography of legal discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    Cotterill, J. 2003. Language and power in Court: A Linguistic analysis of the O.J. Simpson trial. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
    Drew, P. 1992. Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examintions – the case of a trial for rape. Dlm. P. Drew & J. Heritage (Pnyt.). Talk at Work: Interactions in Institutional settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    Jefferson, G. 1989. Notes on a possible metric which provides for a “standard maximum silence” of approximately one second in conversation. Dlm. D. Roger & P. Bull (Pnyt.) Conversation: an Interdisciplinary Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Mastters. Hlm. 166-96.
    Gibbons, J. 2003. Forensic linguistics: An introduction to language in the justice system. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
    Levi, J.N. & A.G. Walker. 1990. Language in the judicial process. New York: Plenum Press.
    Low Hop Bing (Hon. Justice Dato). 2002. The use of National Language (Bahasa Malaysia) in the Courts in Malaysia. Kertas kerja dibentangkan dalam The International Conference on Language, Linguistics and the Real World, 16-18 Oktober, anjuran Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur.
    Maley, T. 2000. The case of the long-nosed Pootoroo: The framing and construction of expert wtness testimony. Dlm. Sarangi, S. & M. Coulthard. Discourse and social life. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.
    Mead, R. 1984. Courtroom discourse. Monograph. English Language Research. Birmingham: Birmingham University Press.
    Metzger, T. R. & W.A. Beach. 1996. Preserving alternative versions: Interactional techniques for organizing Courtroom cross-examinations. Dlm. Communication Research. 23, Isu 6: 749-766.
    Noraini Ibrahim. 2003. Control and authority in Courtroom cross-examintions in a Ciminal High Court in Malaysia. Dlm. Asmah Hj. Omar et al. (Pnyt.). Language and Empowerment. Kuala Lumpur: Persatuan Bahasa Moden Malaysia. Hlm. 125-149.
    O’Barr, W.M. 1982. Linguistic evidence: Language power and strategy in the Courtroom. London: Academic Press.
    Paul, A. 2000. Evidence: Practice and procedure. Kuala Lumpur: Malayan Law Journal Sdn. Bhd.
    Saville-troike, M. 1982. The Ethnography of Communicatron. Oxford: Blackwell.
    Stygall, G. 1994. Trial language: Differential discourse processing and discursive formations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
    Stygall, G. 2001. A Different Class Of Witnesses: Experts In The Courtroom. Dlm. Discourse Studies: 3.1: 327-49.
    Tiersma, P.M. 1999. Legal language. London: The University of Chicago Press.