TENSIONS were high and many must have been glued to their screens yesterday (Aug 15) morning as they waited to read about the latest court updates on former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak’s RM42 mil SRC International corruption case.
After he was found guilty in 2020 over charges of power abuse, criminal breach of trust and money laundering, and meted an RM210 mil fine, Najib appealed the case all the way to the Federal Court, which began hearing his final appeal yesterday.
However, the apex court allowed the Pekan MP’s bid to include fresh evidence in the case, including on a supposed “conflict of interest” by trial judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, and is now hearing arguments from both sides.
FocusM recaps what happened in court yesterday, based on local news reports:
What Najib’s lawyers argued
According to Najib’s lead counsel, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, all “ingredients” necessary for the admission of fresh evidence have been satisfied, as per Section 93 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 and established case law.
These criteria include evidence not being available during trial, said evidence being relevant to the issues raised and that they are credible.
According to Free Malaysia Today (FMT), Hisyam said the fresh evidence, allegedly sent to Najib in anonymous envelopes between May 9 and July 7, 2022, was not available to him, nor were they supplied by the prosecution during the original trial.
“This additional evidence would determine whether the trial judge could have been a potential witness in the SRC case and was disqualified from presiding over the trial,” he said.
Hisyam added that the former finance minister was unaware at the time of Nazlan’s alleged knowledge and involvement in the establishment of SRC through the latter’s previous positions as Maybank’s company secretary and group general counsel.
Najib contends that the Court of Appeal court judge had failed to disclose these roles when 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) had asked Maybank for an RM6.17 bil loan to help finance 1MDB’s acquisition of Tanjong Energy.
The defence also argued that Nazlan’s role in Maybank was closely related to the matters of SRC, pointing out that Maybank was instrumental in the formation of the former 1MDB subsidiary company.
The defence further claimed that nowhere in Nazlan’s 2020 ruling did he mention Maybank’s role in SRC’s set-up, which goes against his finding that Najib set it up solely out of self-interest (i.e. to misappropriate the funds).
What the prosecution said in response
The prosecution, however, argued that the allegedly fresh evidence, which is based on what certain individuals allegedly told the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), was “hearsay upon hearsay”.
Noting that these individuals also did not speak to Najib personally, deputy public prosecutor Datuk V. Sithambaram said the Federal Court should reject the fresh evidence bid.
Najib’s additional evidence bid is reportedly backed by affidavits based on what three MACC officers and two bankers purportedly told MACC during the anti-graft agency’s investigation into SRC.
“The application is not a fresh evidence bid but camouflaged (as a fishing expedition into) the alleged conflict of interest on the part of Nazlan,” Sithambaram said, according to Malaysiakini.
Such statements, he added, could not be divulged as they were privileged documents and not subject to disclosure before and after trial.
Sithambaran also said “so what” if Nazlan had worked for Maybank, arguing that his previous employment at the bank did not mean there were conflicts of interest that prevented the judge from presiding over the trial.
This is because Nazlan did not personally give advice on the setting up of SRC, even though the bank did provide consultancy services to them (at a cost of RM800,000).
According to FMT, the prosecution also noted that Nazlan’s involvement in Maybank was already in the public domain before he was elevated as a judge in 2015.
It further questioned why the defence had not raised the alleged conflict of interest issue during trial.
Background
In July 2020, Nazlan found Najib guilty of seven charges of power abuse, criminal breach of trust and money laundering in the SRC International case. He was also fined RM210 mil and sentenced to 12 years in jail.
Najib appealed the charges and fine at the Court of Appeal. Last December, the appellate court dismissed the appeal and ruled that Najib’s conviction, alongside the jail sentence and fine, should be upheld.
The Court of Appeal also infamously branded Najib’s conduct in the misappropriation of funds from SRC International as a “national embarrassment”. Najib used to be SRC’s adviser emeritus and chairperson of 1MDB’s board of advisers.
Najib is out on bail pending the Federal Court hearing, slated for Aug 15 to 19, followed by Aug 23 to 26, 2022.
A five-member Federal Court bench – led by Chief Justice Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat – is hearing the appeal, which continues today. – Aug 16, 2022
Main photo credit: DPA
