KUALA LUMPUR, Jan 5 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak plans to provoke contempt of court docket action in opposition to at the least one media outlet over alleged “unfair” reporting on his 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) trial, his lawyer advised the High Court at present.
Just listening to for the 1MDB trial this morning, Najib’s lead lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah highlighted to the High Court about alleged unfair information studies on Tuesday relating to court docket testimony by the forty ninth prosecution witness on the accused.
“Yang Arif, I’ve instruction from my consumer, that in view of what transpired in court docket on the final event, there was very prejudicial and unfair reporting in the native press,” he advised trial decide Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
Shafee singled out one explicit information report that featured the headline “Najib allegedly used US$681mil linked to 1MDB to affect 2013 General Election votes”.
He claimed this headline is unfaithful and incorrect as US$620 million out of US$681 million – which had entered Najib’s checking account – was allegedly “returned” to the sender.
Shafee claimed that there has “by no means been proof” that the rest of the cash, US$61 million, was used to affect the 2013 basic election (GE13), saying as a substitute that there’s proof to present that Najib used some of this cash to give to varied Umno divisions, some political issues, and issues associated to welfare and company social duty.
He mentioned that a number of different media retailers additionally featured headlines of Najib being suspected of receiving US$681 million to purchase GE13 votes or that Najib was suspected of utilizing the cash to purchase votes, arguing that the way in which these headlines have been written weren’t appropriate.
Shafee mentioned Najib has given him directions and that they’re positively taking action in opposition to the information outlet talked about for contempt.
“We are contemplating all of the others in making a doable contempt utility,” he added.
Shafee then argued that the forty ninth prosecution witness, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigating officer Senior Superintendent Nur Aida Arifin, was making conclusions about her investigation when she was not an knowledgeable.
He mentioned her function is simply to gather proof and never to make opinions.
Shafee additionally argued that it must be the trial decide that makes conclusions on some of the problems testified by Nur Aida.
He urged the prosecution to rethink rephrasing the alleged “prejudicial” components in her witness assertion which allegedly contain rumour or conclusions she had made.
Shafee additionally mentioned solely MACC is ready to conceal the id of the complainant, as MACC officers would be the one making studies lodged to MACC based mostly on info acquired from the complainant or informer.
He later claimed such studies lodged with the MACC would quantity to rumour, because the MACC officers could be those writing the studies based mostly on info from the unique complainant.
Just listening to for the 1MDB trial this morning, Najib’s lead lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah highlighted to the High Court about alleged unfair information studies on Tuesday relating to court docket testimony by the forty ninth prosecution witness on the accused. ― Picture by Hari Anggara
But deputy public prosecutor Ahmad Akram Gharib identified that the media was merely reporting on Nur Aida’s court docket testimony, the place she was quoting verbatim from a report made to the MACC to provoke investigations in 2015 on Najib.
“So we, the prosecution, we won’t management what and the way the press make their studies. But what’s extra essential here’s what the witness says in court docket and what turns into proof earlier than Your Lordship, it is simply quoting from a report and that report verbatim is what she mentioned in court docket,” he mentioned.
He added that Nur Aida was simply testifying as a matter of proven fact that such a report was made in 2015 to the MACC.
As for Shafee’s highlighting that the informer’s id is hid, Akram famous that Section 29(4) of the MACC Act 2009 requires studies of corruption offences lodged with the MACC to “be saved secret” and never to be disclosed till an individual is charged in court docket because of this of the report.
Akram mentioned most circumstances investigated by the MACC are public curiosity circumstances involving high-ranking folks, and that Parliament had handed this regulation which he mentioned was obligatory to allow the id of the complainant to be saved secret.
He mentioned this was why an MACC officer would be the one placing down a complainant’s info in writing right into a report, as a substitute of the complainant being the one writing down the report.
He once more mentioned Nur Aida was merely studying out the report lodged with the MACC in 2015 to the court docket.
“What and the way the newspapers report is past us, I am unable to be telling the press how to do their studies, due to this fact it is not going to be honest if any allegation is made in opposition to us that we try to do humorous issues right here. She is simply referring to a report and skim it aloud in open court docket,” he mentioned.
As for the way Nur Aida’s witness assertion was phrased, Akram mentioned the prosecution will undergo the witness assertion together with her to see if she is agreeable to rephrase sure components.
In gentle of Shafee’s grievance, Akram mentioned the prosecution would checklist down the related paperwork for every of her factors as a substitute of following the preliminary plan of referring a listing of paperwork for all of the factors on the finish of her testimony on the examination-in-chief stage.
Following this, Nur Aida then resumed testifying on the findings of her investigation on alleged energy of abuse offences by Najib in relation to 1MDB funds.
Najib’s 1MDB trial resumes subsequent Monday, with Nur Aida anticipated to stay in the witness stand.
“Information acquired said that in 2013, prime minister YAB Datuk Seri Mohd Najib bin Abdul Razak by means of his account at AmPrivate Banking, AmBank Berhad quantity 2112022009694 had acquired cash totalling round USD 681 million from Tanore Finance Corporation by means of Falcon Private Bank Singapore the place it’s suspected that cash is wang rasuah (bribery cash) utilized by YAB Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak to purchase votes throughout preparation to face the 2013 basic elections. This grievance was made to perform investigations underneath Section 16 MACC Act 2009,” Nur Aida had mentioned in studying out the unique grievance dated May 4, 2015 made by an officer to allow the MACC probe.
Nur Aida, who was an assistant investigating officer in MACC’s 2015 investigations involving Najib, was later appointed on May 14, 2018 to be the investigating officer in relation to Najib and 1MDB funds. She additionally learn out the contents of a May 17, 2018 grievance which she had signed, the place it was said that info was acquired that the previous prime minister Najib had between 2011 and 2013 because the chairman of 1MDB’s advisory board and as finance minister acquired gratification by means of 1MDB’s public funding funds totalling RM3.217 billion which have been despatched to his non-public AmBank account (the identical account quantity ending 9694) for his private pursuits.
In her 2018 grievance, Nur Aida mentioned it was made to allow investigations to be carried out underneath Section 23 of the MACC Act 2009.
