- Advertisement -
News

Court rejects Najib’s bid to cite new evidence ahead of verdict on SRC appeal

If his conviction is upheld, the defence is expected to apply for a stay of execution pending further appeal at the Federal Court.

Staff Writers
2 minute read
Share
Former prime minister Najib Razak.
Former prime minister Najib Razak.

The Court of Appeal has rejected Najib Razak’s application to cite more evidence in his SRC International appeal, with its verdict to be delivered as scheduled at 9am tomorrow.

If his conviction is upheld, the defence is expected to apply for a stay of execution pending further appeal at the Federal Court.

Najib had applied to allow new evidence to be adduced in his appeal against his 12-year jail sentence and fine of RM210 million for misappropriating RM42 million in SRC International funds.

His legal team attempted to postpone today’s hearing after one of the lawyers representing the Pekan MP tested positive for Covid-19.



But judge Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil who is leading a three-man bench ordered for the proceedings to be held through Zoom for the affected individuals, saying the other option would be to cancel Najib’s bail and issue a warrant of arrest for him to be brought to court.

In today’s proceedings, Karim who sat with Has Zanah Mehat and Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera made the decision after finding that Najib had failed to show that the evidence was necessary.

The judges also said there were no special circumstances to allow the approval of the application.

Najib had applied for the appeals court to allow and direct for viva voce evidence to be taken from Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief commissioner Azam Baki, MACC investigating officer Rosli Hussein, who was the 57th prosecution witness in the SRC case, as well as the evidence of any other witness in relation to the case.

He said the application was made as soon as he was made aware of and was able to accumulate all the necessary information and documents.

Najib claimed that such information was not available or could not be obtained during his SRC trial at the High Court and when the Court of Appeal previously heard the appeal.