Witness: Umno, Upko among recipients of Ambank account funds

Umno and Upko received millions from an Ambank account linked to former premier Najib Abdul Razak’s SRC International money laundering and corruption trial, a prosecution witness confirmed today.

Badrul Hisam Mohamad, who was senior manager of Ambank's cheque clearance centre in 2015, was testifying at the trial as the fifth prosecution witness.

The 49-year-old told the Kuala Lumpur High Court that AmIslamic Bank cheques from account number 2022011906 had been used to send money to both political parties in February 2015.

The identity of the bank account's owner was not revealed in court. 

During the examination-in-chief today, Badrul Hisam said that the cleared cheques included RM50,000 to Padang Serai Umno chief Asmadi Abu Talib; RM1 million to Upko; RM1 million to Penang Umno’s communications unit; and RM300,000 to Johor Bahru Umno.

The witness made the confirmation after being presented with 17 AmIslamic cheques which were among the items seized in a Bank Negara raid at Ambank’s Jalan Raja Chulan branch, Kuala Lumpur, on July 6, 2015.

The following is a breakdown of the 17 cheques tendered in today's proceedings by Deputy Public Prosecutor Muhammad Saifuddin Hashim Musaimi, all of which were verified by Badrul Hisam:

From account number 2022011906 (owner's identity not revealed thus far):

RM240,000 to Vital Spire Sdn Bhd, on Jan 30, 2015

RM2.5 million to Zulqarnain & Co, on Feb 2, 2015

RM300,000 to Centre for Strategic Engagement, Feb 8, 2015

RM238,914 to Lim Soon Peng, Feb 12, 2015

RM100,000 to ABS Trend Master Sdn Bhd, on Feb 12, 2015

RM400,000 to trustees of Rumah Penyayang Tun Abdul Razak, on Feb 12, 2015

RM1 million to Solar Shine Sdn Bhd, on Feb 17, 2015

RM50,000 to Padang Serai Umno chief Asmadi Abu Talib, on Feb 12, 2015

RM13,800 to Manisah Othman, on Feb 12, 2015

RM56,500 to MOZ Malaysia Sdn Bhd, on Feb 12, 2015

RM1 million to Upko, on Feb 13, 2015

RM1 million to Penang Umno communications unit, on Feb 26, 2015

RM77,300 to Syadilah Enterprise, on Feb 24, 2015

RM300,000 to Johor Bahru Umno, on Feb 26, 2015

From account number 2022011898 (owner's identity not revealed thus far):

RM3.5 million to law firm Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak, on Jan 21, 2015

From SRC International Sdn Bhd account:

RM20 million to Ihsan Perdana Sdn Bhd, on Dec 12, 2014

RM103,351.17 to Ihsan Perdana Sdn Bhd, on March 9, 2015

Najib was BN chairperson and Umno president at the time of the alleged transactions.

Later in the afternoon, judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali threw out Najib's bid to disqualify a sixth prosecution witness from testifying over the alleged spending of laundered money linked to the case.

The defence team had sought to prevent interior design business owner Zulkarnain from giving oral evidence on how he was paid RM100,000 through a cheque for renovation works at Najib's residence at Jalan Langgak Duta, Kuala Lumpur, on Feb 12, 2015.

Zulkarnain is the owner of interior design and construction firm ABS Trend Master Sdn Bhd.

The firm's name, amount paid, and the date of cheque, coincided with the list of purported suspicious transactions confirmed by Badrul Hisam to have taken place.

Nazlan ruled that Zulkarnain's testimony, especially on how the alleged illegal proceeds were spent, was relevant to the seven charges faced by Najib.

"I find the evidence of the (alleged) spending as relevant to the seven charges against the accused.

"Section 4 (2) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amlatfa) deals with the mental element of the accused - the mental element of (alleged) dishonest and proclivity under the Penal Code," Nazlan said before allowing the witness to proceed with his oral evidence.

Heated arguments

The ruling followed heated arguments between the defence and prosecution over whether Zulkarnain should be allowed to proceed with his testimony.

Najib's counsel Farhan Read (left in photo) launched the first volley with a preliminary objection under Section 136 of the Evidence Act 1950, due to the purported irrelevance of Zulkarnain's testimony on how the allegedly laundered money was spent.

"Why is the witness called by the prosecution? To tell the court what? How the accused spent the money (from money allegedly laundered into the accused's account)? This is an entirely irrelevant consideration as a matter of practice.

"(The relevant issue is) Whether the accused has mens rea under the section (of Amlatfa). I seek for the court to enquire the prosecution why the witness is called. We are not as advantaged as the prosecution,” Farhan said.

Mens rea is a Latin term which refers to intention or knowledge of wrongdoing.

"From what we can anticipate, we are of the view that the witness has nothing which can help determine if the accused possessed the mens rea of the charges," he added.

Najib's lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah then backed Farhan by stating that Zulkarnain's testimony is irrelevant, as Najib's charges are related to allegedly receiving money from illegal activities.

"All the (alleged) offences relate to receiving the (laundered) money. If receiving of money is proven, and that is a big ‘if’, that would complete (the proceedings).

"If the money is (allegedly) kept in fixed deposit or has been spent, it is irrelevant to the offences. Receiving is the key issue," argued Shafee.

Premature prevention

DPP V Sithambaram (photo) countered that the court cannot be prevented prematurely from hearing evidence that may have a bearing in the case against Najib.

"The prosecution had always been given the liberty to present evidence. But here, it is funny, they want charts. Whether it (the testimony) discloses an offence, it is up to Your Lordship (Nazlan) to decide," he said.

Attorney-General Tommy Thomas then stood up and told the court that the witness could help establish the element of the offence - whether (Najib has) actual knowledge (of wrongdoing) - or a wilful blindness test. Then, he added, “we can call witnesses to testify on what happened to the money”.

"It is very wrong for judges at the first instance in a trial to be unable to call evidence (sic), and we cannot prove the case. How can we prove the case otherwise?

“So (by raising preliminary objection under Sectior) 136 in regards to calling evidence, so every time there is inconvenient evidence, you say (it) cannot be called. That crosses the jurisprudence (line) and cannot be right," argued Thomas.

After the ruling, Zulkarnain testified that the RM100,000 was partial payment (bayaran separuh masa) for work done, which was wrapped up by early 2015.

Under examination-in-chief by Saifuddin, the witness said that he was hired between August and Sept 2014, to construct a pantry inside a store at Najib's house, as well as build a racks for books and for clothing.

Toward the end of proceedings this afternoon, the seventh prosecution witness Mohammad Zakariyya Zearat Khan, 35, testified that he received a cheque worth RM56,500 on Feb 24, 2015, for plumbing work on Najib's Langgak Duta home.

Zakariyya, whose plumbing company is Moz Malaysia Sdn Bhd, told Saifuddin that he was hired to fix a water supply problem at the residence.

He said he did so by constructing a 6,000-litre capacity tank to pump water to the home, which is located in a hilly area.

Zakariyya's firm, payment amount, and related date of the check also coincided with the earlier testimony of Badrul Hisam in regards to the transaction trail from Ambank accounts linked to Najib's case.

Beginning Monday next week, it is understood that the prosecution will call other witnesses linked to the transaction trail which was revealed in court today. - Mkini