Court unanimously throws out Najib's appeal, allows stay of execution

 

The Court of Appeal today upheld the conviction as well as 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine against Najib Abdul Razak in the RM42 million SRC International corruption case.

A three-person bench chaired by Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil unanimously dismissed the former prime minister’s appeal to reverse the guilty verdict and sentencing over seven charges encompassing abuse of power, criminal breach of trust and money laundering.

During the hybrid online proceedings this morning, the appellant’s face looked composed as the verdict was read out by Karim. The other members of the bench are Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera and Has Zanah Mehat.

The court also allowed the defence's application for a stay of execution of the 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine. The order is pending Najib's appeal to the Federal Court.

The former premier is seeking to set aside the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s ruling on July 28 last year, which found him guilty on one charge of abuse of position as then premier, three counts of criminal breach of trust, and three counts of money laundering involving RM42 million of funds from SRC. 

The lower court had also imposed the sentences but stayed its execution pending disposal of Najib’s appeal. The trial judge was Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

Nothing wrong with trial judge's finding

While reading out the unanimous decision, Abdul Karim said that the bench found nothing wrong with the trial judge’s finding that the prosecution succeeded in proving every main ingredient in the seven charges against Najib.

The Court of Appeal judge pointed out that for the single charge of abuse of power under Section 23 of the MACC Act, the trial judge has correctly found that the former prime minister has a personal interest in ensuring the Cabinet he led greenlighted two government guarantees for a RM4 billion loan to SRC between 2011 and 2012.

We entirely agree with the finding of the learned trial judge that there is overwhelming evidence which established the glaring personal interest that the appellant (Najib) had in the Cabinet decision to issue the two government guarantees (for the Retirement Fund Inc or KWAP loan in two tranches of RM2 billion each to SRC between 2011 and 2012).

“The learned trial judge concluded from the evidence of the appellant’s role and involvement in the establishment of SRC, the initial set-up grant, KWAP loans, government guarantee arrangement, as well as the ownership and governance structure of SRC, and the control of SRC funds and the flow of SRC funds into the personal accounts of the appellant establishes the fact that the appellant had an interest in SRC that was beyond that of his public office.

“We find no good reason to disagree with the finding,” Abdul Karim said.

Previously a subsidiary of 1MDB, SRC International later became wholly owned by the Minister of Finance Incorporated (MoF Inc).

Besides being former prime minister, Najib also used to be finance minister, SRC International’s advisor emeritus, and chairperson of 1MDB’s board of advisors.

In relation to the three counts of CBT, Abdul Karim said the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge that Najib had committed misappropration of funds from SRC International, via three tranches of RM27 million, RM5 million and RM10 million into the former premier’s account, between late 2014 and early 2015.

Money was utilised by Najib and his close associates

The Court of Appeal judge noted that the RM42 million was not only utilized by Najib, but that the transactions involved the former prime minister’s close associates such as his late principal private secretary Azlin Alias and SRC International’s former CEO Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil.

“...Nik Faisal who was not merely the mandate holder for the appellant’s bank account but was also the director and the bank signatory of SRC, and who was the link between the appellant and the SRC’s board of directors.

“As agent and mandate holder, Nik Faisal’s instructions to AmIslamic Bank as regards the movement of funds in the appellant’s bank accounts are deemed to be instructions from the appellant.

“Once the funds were received into the appellant’s accounts, he utilized the funds by issuing several cheques. In the circumstances, the appellant would know the funds being credited into the bank accounts, and would in law be responsible and accountable for the activities in his accounts,” Abdul Karim said.

In regards to the three money laundering charges, the Court of Appeal judge said the prosecution succeeded in establishing the three criteria of the offence under Section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering Act (Amla).

He noted that the three ingredients are firstly, that Najib received the monies stated in the charges; secondly that the monies were proceeds from unlawful activity; and thirdly that Najib’s knowledge of the source of the funds can be inferred from objective factual circumstances.

“The culpability of the appellant is based on the fact that he was knowingly concerned with the illegal proceeds from unlawful activities.

“The evidence clearly shows that the appellant knew, or had reason to believe or had reasonable suspicion that the funds entered his personal bank accounts at AmIslamic Bank were proceeds of unlawful activities.

“The appellant had without reasonable excuse failed to take steps to ascertain whether or not the funds were proceeds of unlawful activities,” Abdul Karim said.

He also pointed out that the Court of Appeal agreed with the trial judge in imposing the 12-year jail term and RM210 million fine against Najib in the SRC International case.

“Overall, we find that the learned trial judge did not err in the application of the sentencing principles, neither is there an error on the part of the trial judge in appreciating the material facts placed before him, nor had he made a wrong decision as to the proper factual basis for the sentencing, nor do we find the sentences to be manifestly excessive.

“We find that there is proper consideration by the learned trial judge of all factors that are relevant to be taken into consideration in sentencing,” Abdul Karim said. - Mkini