KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court ruled on Wednesday (Oct 30) that defense claims of bias and sloppy investigations surrounding the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) case involving Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak are baseless.
Judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah (now Court of Appeal judge) said this was because the investigation had started in 2014 when the suspect was still prime minister and then resumed in 2018.
“With regard to the allegation that Datuk Seri Najib was asked certain questions when his statement was taken under Section 53(3) MACC Act, I am of the opinion that this did not create any prejudice on the part of the accused in light of the nature of the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses, in particular PW49,” he said as he read his 41-page summary of the judgment for almost two hours.
The prosecution’s 49th witness (PW49) was an investigating officer of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), Senior Supt Nur Aida Ariffin.
Earlier, Justice Sequerah ordered Najib, 71, to defend himself on four counts of using his position to extract RM2.3 billion in gratuity from 1MDB funds and 21 counts of money laundering involving the same funds , after determining that the prosecutor had determined an excellent sentence. facie case at the end of the prosecution’s case.
Judge Sequerah also rejected the defense’s contention that the four corruption charges and 21 money laundering charges were flawed, ambiguous, ambiguous and therefore bad law and contrary to Section 163 of the Malaysian Code of Criminal Procedure (CPC).
He said after reviewing and investigating all four charges, it is clear that they include the time, place and crimes for which the suspect is charged.
“All four corruption charges and the 21 money laundering charges therefore meet all legal criteria required for an indictment as provided for in Articles 152, 153 and 154 of the CPC,” he said.
He said Section 422 of the CPC provides that any irregularity in the charge is rectifiable provided the accused has not been prejudiced in any way and there has been no failure of justice.
“I am not of the opinion that the accused has been misled or suffered prejudice in relation to the charges. In any event, Section 156 of the CPC states that any errors or omissions (which in my opinion are not the case here) in relation to the allegation should not be considered material unless the suspect has been factually misled by it, which was not the case here,” he said.
In his judgment, Judge Sequerah stated that the prosecution had successfully established that the accused was an officer of a public body in relation to all four charges of abuse of power under Article 23(1) of the MACC Act, which relates on abuse of office. or position for satisfaction.
The judge noted that there was no serious challenge to the suspect’s position as Prime Minister, Minister of Finance of Malaysia and as Chairman of the Board of Advisors of the 1MDB and that the suspect was therefore an official of a public body in the field of the material issue. time.
“The evidence shows that the suspect took the first action, based inter alia on the evidence of PW11 (Tan Sri Mazidah), who was Deputy Chief Secretary (Cabinet) in the Prime Minister’s Department, which showed that the suspect on 1 April 2009 attended the Cabinet meeting presented a memorandum from the Ministry of Finance and obtained Cabinet approval for the provision of a guarantee by the Government of Malaysia to the Terengganu Investment Authority Berhad (TIA) to enable TIA to lend on the domestic and foreign market for an amount of up to 30%. up to RM5 billion through the Islamic Medium-Term Notes (IMTN) Programme,” he said.
He noted that the prosecution’s evidence showed that Najib showed interest in TIA Bhd from the outset and played a central role in the government’s takeover of TIA, which was later renamed 1MDB.
The judge added that the suspect was also instrumental in getting the Cabinet to agree to the government providing a guarantee to enable TIA to obtain the RM5 billion IMTN loan.
He said that investigation and evaluation of the evidence showed that Najib had acted in matters in which he had a vested interest, and that these actions constituted the essential facts necessary to establish a rebuttable presumption that the suspect lost office or had misused position for satisfaction under section 23. (2) of the MACC Act.
He said the money trail report also showed that between Feb 23, 2011 and June 14, 2011, about US$20 million (RM60,629,839.43) of the proceeds were credited to the suspect’s AmIslamic Bank account from an account at Riyadh Bank, Saudi Arabia, were credited. can be traced back to the issuance of the IMTN bond in 2009 and the Syndicated Term Loan in 2010.
Regarding the second charge concerning the acquisition of independent power producers (IPPs) Tanjong Energy Holdings Sdn Bhd and Mastika Lagenda Sdn Bhd, the judge said the prosecution has adduced evidence showing that the accused took certain actions that led to 1MDB these transactions have been entered into.
He further said that the money trail followed by Adam Ariff Mohd Roslan (PW47, Analyst of Bank Negara Malaysia) showed that the funds totaling RM 90,899,927.28 deposited into the suspect’s account came from of the issuance of bonds intended for the acquisition of Tanjong Energy’s IPP. 1MEL) and the IPP of Mastika Lagenda (1MELL). – Bernama