PUTRAJAYA: The so-called Arab donation to Najib Razak is highly improbable due to contradictions of evidence by the defence, the Court of Appeal heard in the former prime minister’s RM42 million SRC International Sdn Bhd (SRC) corruption appeal hearing.
Ad hoc prosecutor V Sithambaram said it was also “absolutely bizarre” for Najib to return a contribution of RM2.6 billion (US$620 million) from the late King Abdullah to Tanore Finance Corp in August 2013.
“This was a desperate attempt to bolster the defence case. Najib, in his evidence, testified that it was fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho who asked him to remit the money to Tanore,” he said.
He said Najib had testified that there would be political connotation if the money remained in his personal account in Ambank.
“The Arab contribution was given to him in his capacity as prime minister and to keep Malaysia as a moderate (nation). However, the Cabinet did not know about the contribution,” he said.
Sithambaram, who was given a special licence by the attorney-general to prosecute this case, said the money could have been placed in the Federal Consolidated Fund, which would have been more beneficial to Malaysia and in line with the wishes of the king.
He said Najib also did not thank the king for the purported donation by writing a letter or personally meeting him to express his gratitude.
It would also have been an insult to return the huge sum to the company, he said, adding that “I don’t know what the king has to do with the company”.
He said it was an open secret as to who had an interest in Tanore, but declined to elaborate as it was subject matter in Najib’s 1MDB trial.
The defence’s position is that Low, better known as Jho Low, had arranged for a meeting between the Saudi king and Najib in January 2010 through a non-diplomatic channel.
It said the monarch had expressed his support for Najib to remain in power so that Malaysia did not fall into the hands of extremists.
Sithambaram said close scrutiny of Najib’s evidence showed that there were doubts if the purported meeting with the king actually took place and whether the monarch promised him financial support.
“The appellant (Najib) merely stated that the king had promised support but explained he was only later informed by Low in the middle of 2010 that the monarch had agreed to provide financial support,” he said.
He said two (former) ministers – Jamil Khir Baharom and Anifah Aman – and Malaysian envoy to Saudi Arabia Syed Omar Al-Saggaf, who were part of Najib’s entourage, gave contradicting evidence on the exact date the meeting took place.
He said Najib also attempted to rely upon the evidence of three Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission officers who were defence witnesses – Nasharudin Amir, Fikri Ab Rahim and Dzulkifli Ahmad – to prove that one Prince Saud had signed four letters pledging the donation.
It was the prosecution’s contention, he said, that the three witnesses could only verify attending a meeting with three Arab men at a large house in Riyadh, one of whom was purportedly Prince Saud, but they could not verify the actual identity of the prince.
They also did not confirm either orally or in a written statement recorded by MACC that the letters were indeed issued by Prince Saud.
Sithambaram said Nasharudin’s evidence showed that Prince Saud had never confirmed his identity except to show his purported passport.
“The authenticity of the passport was never confirmed and the MACC statement taken on behalf of Prince Saud was not signed by him but by his attorney named Koman,” he said, adding that the relationship between Prince Saud and the king was never established.
In July last year, High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali sentenced Najib to 12 years’ jail and ordered him to pay a RM210 million fine after finding him guilty of seven corruption charges in relation to RM42 million belonging to SRC, a former unit of 1MDB.
Najib was accused of abusing his power as prime minister by giving government guarantees on SRC’s RM4 billion loan from the Retirement Fund Inc (KWAP).
He was charged with three counts of criminal breach of trust (CBT) and three money laundering charges in relation to RM42 million belonging to SRC which ended up in his bank account.
The hearing continues. - FMT
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.