Najib had no control over SRC funds, defence lawyer submits

Former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak had no control of SRC International funds and thus should not be held liable under criminal breach of trust (CBT) law, the Kuala Lumpur High Court heard today.

Defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, in his oral submission at SRC International criminal trial against Najib (above), said the only persons who have control over the company's monies were its directors and signatories for its bank accounts.

Najib, the lawyer stressed, was not one of them.

Citing Section 409 of the Penal Code, Shafee told the court that it stipulated CBT as an offence committed by whoever entrusted with a property or with any dominion over the property.

"So in our context dealing with SRC money, the people who got entrustment of SRC funds are the directors who are signatories to the account.

"It cannot be anybody else to have entrustment of SRC money," he said.

The politician also had no dominion to dispose any SRC International assets nor that he can do anything about it, he said.

Shafee was wrapping up the defence's submission at the end of prosecution's case, which summed up a total of 58 days of SRC International trial.

This was the last stage in the trial before High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali makes his decision whether to call Najib to enter his defence. 

Nazlan had set this Nov 11 to deliver his decision.

Najib (above) was facing a total of seven criminal charges related to RM42 million misappropriated from the company, including three charges of CBT. The other charges are three counts of money laundering and a count for abuse of power. 

No AMLATFA offences in SRC International case, claims defence

On the money laundering charges, Shafee submitted that that there were no money laundering offences that were committed within the RM42m case.

Thus, the lead defence attorney said, the court should drop the three charges against Najib under Section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFA).

According to his argument, receiving of monies in one's hands may complete a CBT offence, but does not make it money laundering until the money is transacted later.

"My Lord, you asked a very pertinent question yesterday, whether by receiving the money in his (Najib) accounts, it gets pregnant with another offence just because he received the amount.

"The answer is no. He received this money, more or less on the same date (as charges under AMLATFA). So there is no offence of AMLA within the current charges. All AMLA charges ought to drop."

Shafee was referring to a question posed by Nazlan to the prosecution during yesterday's oral submission session.

Meanwhile, the prosecution and defence were also at loggerheads over admissibility of documentary and hearsay evidences in the trial.

This comes as the defence in its written submission sought to strike out third party evidences given by witnesses and documents that were not confirmed by those with first hand knowledge. - Mkini