PUTRAJAYA (Oct 30): Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal address to court last week in the main 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) trial is not a statement of fact, but rather, a stab at turning an evidence-based trial into an exercise of “political theatre”, the court heard on Thursday.
Wrapping up the prosecution’s submission at the end of the defence’s case, where the ex-PM is on trial for 25 charges allegedly for misappropriating about RM 2.2 billion from the state strategic development firm, deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Datuk Ahmad Akram Gharib said that Najib’s remarks were “unprecedented” and a “calculated distortion of facts and law”.
“This so-called ‘Foreword by the Accused’ is not a statement of fact — it is an exercise in self-exoneration and political theatre. It attempts to transform a corruption prosecution grounded in evidence into a political persecution narrative.
“The accused (Najib) paints himself as a victim of rogue subordinates, when in truth he was the single-most powerful decision-maker in Malaysia, as well as in 1MDB during the material time [...].
“The accused was not the victim. He was the orchestrator,” Akram stressed.
Currently, the 1MDB-Tanore trial is at the final leg, where parties are wrapping up their case before the High Court delivers its ultimate decision.
At the start of the submissions last Tuesday (Oct 21), the court had allowed the imprisoned ex-PM to address the court, where Najib had said that he was not seeking immunity, but rather, equality.
Naming several former 1MDB officials — former general counsel Jasmine Loo Ai Swan, former chief executive officers Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi and Mohd Hazem Abdul Rahman, former chief financial officer Azmi Tahir, and Najib’s former officer Datuk Amhari Efendi Nazaruddin — Najib had said that they were the ones involved in multi-million-dollar transfers and questionable decisions — yet, none has been charged.
Addressing this, Akram said that Najib was not a “detached overseer, but the fountainhead of authority” who was the source of the instructions.
Akram impressed upon the court that Najib’s assertion that the other 1MDB personnel acted on their own volition was not supported by the overwhelming evidence which states otherwise.
“Witnesses testified that no major decision was possible without the accused’s express approval. Even dissenting directors felt compelled to comply after the accused’s intervention. The clear example is the ‘phone call’ to Tan Sri Bakke Salleh that caused the Board to hastily approve the PetroSaudi joint venture (JV), despite serious reservations,” he said.
The DPP was referring to the oft-repeated instance of the phone call made to the former 1MDB chairman of the Board (BOD) before a board meeting, asking him to expedite the JV. The board gave its conditional approval, which was subsequently not adhered to by the management.
Furthermore, the management had transferred US$1 billion, which was 1MDB’s share of the JV, into two entities — US$300 million to the right JV account and the other US$700 million to Good Star Ltd, an outfit which was later revealed to be linked to fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho (Jho Low). This incalcitrant behaviour prompted Bakke’s eventual resignation.
“Each witness therefore operated within a structure created and dominated by the accused. Their actions cannot be divorced from his authority,” Akram argued on Thursday.
The prosecution has wrapped up its submission.
The defence will reply and that will wrap up the seven-year-long proceedings. They are expected to finish on Friday.
Presiding judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah will then set a date to deliver his decision.