The Kuala Lumpur High Court today ruled there was no evidence that Najib Razak had explicitly directed the amendments to the final 1MDB audit report to exonerate himself from any civil or criminal liability.

Justice Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, in his judgment, said the former prime minister was merely concerned that the audit report could be politically spun, and that the amendments to the audit report were based on the judgment of former auditor-general Ambrin Buang and documents from the first accused, former 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda Kandasamy.

"This would not have been necessary if 1MDB’s management had been more cooperative before the publication of the earlier audit report.

"There is no evidence to show that Ambrin was forced to attend the meetings or make changes to the audit report.

"As for the gratification that was alleged to have been sought, I agree that there was no causal link between the amendments made and the gratification alleged," said the judge.

He added that the prosecution had not established how the items removed or amended could give rise to civil or criminal liability for Najib.

The judge, in acquitting Najib of using his position to order amendments to the final 1MDB audit report before it was presented to the Public Accounts Committee, said he was of the opinion that the items removed from the earlier audit report would not have given rise to any civil or criminal liability for the former prime minister.

"The amendments as stated by Ambrin was justified. The amendments were also known to the Public Accounts Committee and openly discussed," said Zaini.

Therefore, he said, the presumption under Section 23 (2) of the Malaysian-Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 could not apply as the prosecution could not prove gratification.

Najib, 70, who is currently serving a 12-year jail sentence at Kajang Prison for the misappropriation of RM42 million in SRC International funds, was charged under Section 23 (1) of the MACC Act.

Zaini said even Ambrin had confirmed that there were no specific instructions from Najib to amend or remove anything from the audit report.

"There was no evidence that Ambrin was forced to attend the meetings or make changes to the audit report," he said.

He added that Najib was entitled to receive a copy of the audit report as he was the finance minister and a stakeholder of 1MDB.

This was also admitted by Ambrin and one of the prosecution witnesses as the norm, he said.

On 1MDB's two financial statements, the judge said it would seem that Najib had no knowledge of this until it was brought to his attention by Ambrin.

He said Ambrin, who carried out the audit of 1MDB, was granted the independence to carry out his duties due to the security of tenure under Article 105 of the Federal Constitution and was thus conferred wide powers under the Audit Act 1957.

"Ambrin was, therefore, given the independence to carry out his duties without fear or favour. There are consequently very few reasons, if any, for the auditor-general to be cowed, coerced, or forced to make any decisions contrary to his belief or duties.

"He struck me as determined to carry out his duties diligently and not one to suffer fools gladly. He would answer any questions posed to the point and did not mince his words when required. He is the epitome of professionalism," he said.

Meanwhile, Zaini said that Arul Kanda had not attempted to camouflage the shenanigans surrounding 1MDB.

"He was roped in to rescue the company and left what was presumably a promising career abroad. It is general knowledge that he was publicly vilified for the 1MDB affairs, perhaps unfairly as many of the problems were caused before his time," he said.

The judge, in acquitting Arul Kanda of abetting Najib, said there was no evidence to show that he was complicit or responsible for the problems afflicting 1MDB.

"I find that Arul Kanda made a true and full discovery of all things as to which he was lawfully examined and order that a certificate of indemnity under the seal of the court be issued to him stating that he made a true and full discovery of all things examined under the provisions of Section 63(3) of the MACC Act.

"This certificate shall be a bar to all legal proceedings against him in respect of the matters arising from the charges in this case. Arul Kanda is discharged and acquitted of the charge against him," he said.

Zaini likewise ruled for Najib that the prosecution had failed to adduce credible evidence to prove the offence which, if unrebutted or unexplained, would warrant a conviction.

"The second accused is therefore discharged and acquitted of the charge against him," he said.