The second defendant in the civil case on the 'crooked bridge' project said the plaintiff, Shazryl Eskay Abdullah, took him to see the then finance minister, Anwar Ibrahim, because Eskay was close to the minister.

Testifying in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur today, Yahya Abdul Jalil said Eskay had taken him to meet Anwar as it was believed that the cabinet minister could influence the approval of the project.

Asked by the plaintiff's counsel, CV Prabhakaran, why Yahya wanted to see Anwar, Yahya replied: "(Eskay) said that he (Anwar) has influence… to get approval in this particular project.

“(Eskay) knew Anwar. They were very close and (Eskay) took me to talk to (Anwar) about the privatisation project to replace the causeway.” 

NONE Merong Mahawangsa Sdn Bhd and its director Yahya ( right ) are being sued for RM20 million by businessman Eskay for non-payment for lobbying work on the project, officially known as the Malaysia-Singapore International Gateway.

In his testimoney at an earlier hearing on March 10, Eskay, a former diplomat, said he was initially promised 16.66 percent share in Merong Mahawangsa, but this was changed to a lump sum of RM20 million, as stated in a letter of undertaking signed by the company, Yahya and him on July 3, 1998.

However, the defence is arguing that the project never took off and so the RM20 million need not be paid.

Yahya in his testimony today said the government had paid compensation of RM155 million to Merong Mahawangsa when the project was scrapped by then Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi in 2006.

Yahya forgets details

Asked about Eskay’s “services”, Yahya said that he “never knew” that Eskay had met with Megat Junid on the matter and that Eskay had “voluntarily” taken him to Anwar’s house for a “casual meet”.

However, he could not recall much of what transpired in the meeting with Anwar in the  house.

He also could not remember if he had sent the letter to Anwar, lobbying for his company to be granted a 60 percent stake in the project, before or after the meeting.

The businessman also said he did not solicit Eskay’s assistance in seeking international funding for the project.

Yahya was also very hazy on details relating to his relations with Eskay and Anwar, answering “I cannot recall” or “I cannot remember” at least 12 times when questioned by Prabhakaran.

He said he could not remember how long he had known Eskay, nor could he recall the first meeting to discuss the project.

Eskay well-connected

However, answering defence counsel Stanley Chang, Yahya said he was “approached” by the plaintiff.

“I was approached by the plaintiff and he represented to me that he has close relationship with the leaders from all around the world, especially the leaders in Malaysia, and was able to provide his assistance to procure the project,” he said.

He also said Eskay made it seem that he was “able to use his personal influence, good relations, family and contacts with leaders in the government to secure the contract”.

NONE As the events transpired so many years ago, Yahya said, he could not remember if he had in fact offered Eskay ( right ) a 16.66 percent stake in Merong Mahawangsa.

“I signed the letter of understanding, but whether it was because of the agreement (to give Eskay 16.66 percent), I cannot remember,” he said.

Yahya denied that his company had only secured the project, the original straight bridge  between Johor and Singapore, or the revised crooked bridge and other related works, because of Eskay’s help.

The crooked bridge, Customs, Immigration and Quarantine Complex, roadworks, railway line and related works were awarded to Gerbang Perdana Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of Merong Mahawangsa.

However, he said all these were essentially part of one project.

“It is a project in general. Yes, as one, but with different contracts,” he said.

The verdict by judge VT Singham will be delivered on May 5.