Thursday, October 6

Najib says received another ‘anonymous envelope’, claims to know what SRC trial judge told MACC officers in recent probe

0

Najib Razak arrives at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Complex, July 14, 2022. – Bernama photo

KUALA LUMPUR (July 14): Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today claimed to have knowledge of what took place during the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) recent probe of the trial judge who had found him guilty over the misappropriation of SRC International Sdn Bhd’s RM42 million.

In his latest affidavit filed today at the Federal Court, Najib urged the court to allow his application to call in more witnesses to testify on purported new evidence for his SRC case.

In urging the Federal Court to allow his application to nullify the SRC trial and to seek a retrial, Najib continued to insist that the judge Datuk Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali had a conflict of interest due to his alleged failure to disclose his past positions and previous roles in Maybank before he became a judge.

Previously, Najib said he had around May 9 during the Hari Raya period “discovered an anonymous envelope” containing past Maybank documents during the 2010 to 2012 period which was sent to his house at Jalan Langgak Duta, Taman Duta, Kuala Lumpur.

Today, he insisted that he had only discovered these documents through this “anonymous package”, which he said was after the courts’ previous rejection of his bid to add further evidence to his SRC case.

Najib today claimed to have “received another anonymously sent envelope” to his Jalan Langgak Duta house containing Maybank documents in 2012 and 2015, including past emails.

Najib said he had informed his lead defence lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah about this discovery and had shown him the documents in the envelope, claiming that the documents showed Nazlan in March 2012 being the general counsel and company secretary to Maybank while the bank was deliberating on a RM4.17 billion loan to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).

“I am aware that Justice Nazlan had been called in by MACC recently for his statement to be recorded,” Najib said in his affidavit, before going on to say what the judge had allegedly told the MACC recording officer.

Najib said he was also “made to understand” what Nazlan’s response was when asked by MACC officers about matters relating to the Maybank loan, but did not elaborate on how he had this purported knowledge about how the judge responded.

“I am confident and know this averment to be true and I challenge either MACC or the prosecutors to deny this on record and through any affidavit in response,” Najib said.

In the same affidavit, Najib named three MACC officers which he said he would be asking the Federal Court to allow him to call them in to testify in court for the SRC case.

“Very recently, I was reliably informed that the relevant investigators from MACC who are undertaking the investigation against the suspected misconduct of Justice Nazlan are Asrul Ridzuan bin Ahmad Rustami and Noor Syazana binti Kamin, under the supervision of Mohammad Zamri bin Zainul Abidin (Head of Investigations, MACC) all officers of the MACC,” he said, without saying how he knew who were the MACC officers involved in the probe.

Saying that their oral evidence would be necessary, Najib said he has instructed his lawyers to amend his application to include these three names to ask the Federal Court to allow them to become witnesses.

Najib claimed that the further evidence that he proposed to add to the SRC case was not previously available to him, and that his assertions in his affidavit are based on documents he had recently discovered and based on careful analysis by him and his lawyers.

Believing his own claims to be true, he invited the prosecution to challenge his claims.

“I challenge the Prosecution/MACC to produce affidavits from the MACC relevant officers to deny the very specific allegations I have made herein. The two senior MACC officers involved in the investigation against Justice Nazlan ought to confirm or deny the specific allegations I have made.

“The allegations I make are serious and the Federal Court deserves to know the truth from the horses’ mouth and nothing short of this can be tolerated,” he said.

In his affidavit, Najib said he strongly denied that his application was filed to prolong the SRC court case, claiming that it is the “unkindest cut of all” for the prosecution to suggest he is delaying the SRC proceedings for collateral purposes.

“These new and fresh materials and evidence that have just landed on my lap, so to speak, are not my creation or fictitious in any way. These materials are relevant to consider the serious legal issues that I have raised,” he claimed.

Najib’s affidavit was filed today in response to the prosecution’s June 29 affidavit to object to his application to ultimately nullify or seek a retrial of the SRC case.

On June 7, Najib had applied to the Federal Court to allow him to add verbal evidence to his final SRC appeal in court, by calling in former 1MDB CEO Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi as well as Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigating officer Rosli Hussein or Rosli’s successor on matters in Najib’s affidavit to testify.

As part of the application, Najib is also seeking an order from the Federal Court to declare that the entire trial in the High Court for the SRC case be declared null and void, and for the Federal Court to consider ordering a “retrial” of the SRC case against Najib.

Najib’s lawyer Rahmat Hazlan confirmed to Malay Mail that this affidavit was filed today, and said this application will come up for case management at the Federal Court on July 29.

Following a ramping up of online attacks in recent months against the SRC trial judge in what appears to be a bid to discredit the trial’s outcome, the MACC said it had initiated investigations after receiving complaints on March 15, April 23 and April 27.

On May 21, the MACC confirmed it had completed investigations in the case involving Nazlan and handed over investigation papers on May 18 to the Attorney General’s Chambers for further study and direction. – Malay Mail