THE release of the High Court’s 809-page grounds of judgment has shed fresh light on the factors that led to former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak receiving one of the heaviest sentences ever imposed in a Malaysian corruption case.
Beyond finding Najib guilty of all 25 charges linked to the misappropriation of RM2.28 bil from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), the court also provided detailed reasoning for imposing a 15-year prison term and financial penalties totalling RM13.46 bil.
The judgment by then High Court judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah, now a Federal Court judge, makes clear that the punishment was not determined solely by the amount of money involved.
Instead, the court weighed the broader consequences of the scandal, Najib’s position of authority and his conduct throughout the proceedings.
One of the strongest considerations highlighted by the court was the immense damage caused by the 1MDB affair.
Established in 2009 as a strategic development company intended to support Malaysia’s economic growth, 1MDB instead became synonymous with one of the world’s most notorious financial scandals.
According to the judgment, the fallout continues to burden the country, with billions of ringgit in liabilities still requiring settlement. The court noted that the financial repercussions extend beyond the present generation and will continue to affect Malaysians for years to come.
The judge therefore viewed the offences as having far-reaching implications that went well beyond personal wrongdoing.
The court also took into account the reputational damage suffered by Malaysia. The 1MDB scandal attracted global attention and triggered investigations in multiple jurisdictions.
During the trial, reference was made to international descriptions of the affair as an example of large-scale kleptocracy.
For the court, the scandal represented not merely a financial crime but a stain on the country’s standing and credibility on the international stage.
Another central theme in the judgment was Najib’s position within the government and 1MDB.
The court observed that he simultaneously held the offices of prime minister, finance minister and chairman of 1MDB’s board of advisers, giving him substantial influence over decisions involving the state investment fund.
Rather than viewing him as a peripheral figure, the court concluded that the offences involved a serious breach of trust by a person occupying the highest levels of public office.
The judgment emphasised that this was not a case involving a junior employee exploiting weaknesses within an organisation.
Instead, it involved a national leader entrusted with significant authority and responsibility.
Deterrence over public service
Najib’s legal team had pointed to his decades of public service, including nearly half a century in politics and his tenure as prime minister.
However, the court ultimately concluded that these contributions could not outweigh the seriousness of the offences.
In determining the sentence, the judge placed significant emphasis on deterrence, arguing that the punishment should send a clear message that individuals who commit major financial crimes must be prepared to face severe consequences.
The need to protect public interest and discourage similar conduct by others was deemed more important than Najib’s past record of service.
Another factor that featured prominently in the judgment was the court’s assessment that Najib had failed to demonstrate genuine remorse.
According to the judge, Najib continued to place responsibility on others, including 1MDB management, instead of accepting accountability for the wrongdoing.
The court found that evidence presented during the trial showed Najib worked closely with fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho, or Jho Low, in a series of transactions that ultimately channelled funds into his personal accounts.
Although the defence argued that Najib had expressed regret through a public apology letter read by his son in 2024, the court was not persuaded that this amounted to genuine remorse for the offences.
Attempts to conceal the scandal
The judgment also highlighted actions allegedly taken after questions began emerging about 1MDB.
Among the matters considered were claims that investigations were obstructed and efforts made to manage public perception of the scandal.
The court viewed these actions as aggravating factors when determining the appropriate punishment.
What happens next?
Najib is currently serving a separate prison sentence arising from the SRC International case. The High Court ordered that his 15-year sentence in the 1MDB case begin after the completion of his SRC imprisonment.
The former premier has filed an appeal against both his conviction and sentence in the 1MDB case. However, no hearing date has been fixed as the appeal remains in its preliminary stages.
For now, the newly released grounds of judgment provide the clearest explanation yet as to why the court believed a lengthy prison sentence and multibillion-ringgit fine were warranted.
The message from the court was unmistakable: the scale of the scandal, the breach of public trust, the damage inflicted on Malaysia and the absence of remorse collectively justified a punishment intended not only to penalise the offender but also to serve as a warning to future holders of public office.—June 17, 2026
Main image: South China Morning Post
