- Advertisement -
News

Apex court rules Najib did not dispute that RM42 million entered his accounts

The five-man bench led by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat says the defence is 'so inherently inconsistent and incredible that it does not raise a reasonable doubt on the prosecution case'.

Bernama
3 minute read
Share
Former prime minister Najib Razak at the Federal Court in Putrajaya yesterday. Photo: Bernama
Former prime minister Najib Razak at the Federal Court in Putrajaya yesterday. Photo: Bernama

The Federal Court yesterday ruled that Najib Razak during the SRC International trial did not dispute that RM42 million had entered his personal bank accounts. 

A five-man bench led by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat, who read out the 15-page judgement, said the thrust of Najib’s defence was to challenge the mens rea element, that is, he denied knowledge that the funds were from SRC International.

The top judge said the prosecution maintained that the defence was unworthy of belief as, on the one hand, the defence maintained that the RM42 million said to have been wrongfully gained by Najib to the wrongful loss to SRC International was not within the knowledge of the appellant.

On the other hand, the appellant also maintained that he was framed in a conspiracy hatched by fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho or Jho Low, Azlin Alias (his former principal private secretary), Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil (former CEO of SRC), and the bankers. 

"The appellant also maintained the defence that the money credited into his personal AmIslamic bank accounts, ending 880 and 906, which were the subject of the last six charges, were received through Arab donations from Saudi Arabia.
 
"The respondent contended in essence that they had always maintained at trial that these defences are completely inconsistent and diametrically opposed to one another. 

"The respondent also referred to documentary evidence which established that the appellant had expended the RM42 million," she said.

The chief justice added that High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Ghazali had correctly evaluated all of the evidence led in relation to the defence and did not believe the defence narrative. 

Tengku Maimun said the court concluded that the findings of the High Court on the defence were correct.

"In concluding that the defence failed to raise a reasonable doubt on the prosecution case, we find that the learned High Court judge had undertaken a thorough analysis of the evidence produced by the defence. 

"Thus, we are unable to conclude that any of the findings of the High Court, as affirmed by the Court of Appeal, were perverse or plainly wrong so as to warrant appellate intervention. 

"We agree that the defence is so inherently inconsistent and incredible that it does not raise a reasonable doubt on the prosecution case," the chief justice said.

In dismissing the final appeal by Najib, who is also former finance minister, the chief justice said the panel found the appellant’s complaints as contained in the petition of appeal devoid of any merit.

"We find the conviction of the appellant on all seven charges safe. We also find that the sentence imposed is not manifestly excessive. The conviction and sentence are affirmed," she ruled.

Earlier, Tengku Maimun said in the present appeals where counsel was present in name and in person but persistently refused to make any submission despite repeated calls from the court to do so, the court was empowered to proceed with the appeals according to Section 92 of the Courts of the Judicature Act 1964.

She said the bench proceeded to consider the appellant’s appeals by having regard to the appeal records including the petition of appeal setting out no less than 94 grounds of appeal, the submissions filed in the Court of Appeal and the written judgements of the High Court and the Court of Appeal.

"We do not consider it necessary to reproduce the charges or repeat any of the facts which have been adequately stated and analysed in the judgements of the High Court and the Court of Appeal.
 
"The learned trial judge undertook an extensive analysis of all the evidence –documentary and oral – that surfaced before him over the 86 or so days of trial. The Court of Appeal meticulously examined these findings and found no appealable errors," she said.

Tengku Maimun said the role of the apex court, as is settled law, was not to make any new findings of fact on the evidence on record or to substitute those findings with its own.

On July 28, 2020, then High Court judge Nazlan, who is now a Court of Appeal judge, sentenced Najib to 10 years' jail for each of his three counts of criminal breach of trust and each of the three counts of money laundering, and 12 years' jail and a RM210 million fine, in default of five years' jail, in the case of abuse of position.

However, Najib will have to serve only 12 years in jail as the judge ordered all of the jail sentences to run concurrently. 

Last year, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court's decision and dismissed Najib’s appeal to set aside his conviction and jail sentence as well as the fine.