Investigating Power and Control: Uses Of ‘Invariant Tag’ Questions in Malaysian Criminal Trials

Abstract

This paper examines invariant tag questions in the 16 Malaysian criminal proceedings (MAYCRIM) corpus, focusing on their role in cross-examination. Cross-examination questions are pivotal as they elicit information and confirmations from witnesses while allowing them to narrate events. Using a corpus-based forensic discourse analysis, the study combines quantitative and qualitative methods to uncover patterns in tag question usage. Five common agreement tags—do you agree, agree/setuju, correct/betul, particle tak/not, and do you know—are identified as tools for Malaysian barristers to exert coercive pressure on witnesses. The critical analysis reveals a preference for the tag do you agree due to its coercive power. The paper concludes with a discussion on the theoretical and pragmatic implications of these findings for bilingual adversarial systems or postcolonial jurisdictions. It also highlights the disadvantaged position of laypeople in bilingual courtrooms, offering insights and proposing potential solutions to address these challenges.