Aug 7 decision on Najib’s bid to strike out 1MDB audit report tampering charge
Former premier Najib Abdul Razak will know on Aug 7 whether he succeeds in his bid to strike out his charge of alleged tampering with the 1MDB audit report.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court today fixed the date to deliver its decision following submissions by both the prosecution and defence over the matter.
Former premier Najib Abdul Razak (above) will know on Aug 7 whether he succeeds in his bid to strike out his charge of alleged tampering with the 1MDB audit report.
The Kuala Lumpur High Court today fixed the date to deliver its decision following submissions by both the prosecution and defence over the matter.
Previously, judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan set today to hear the striking out application.
During submissions earlier today, lead defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah argued that the striking out application should be allowed in order to prevent oppression and an abuse of court process against the accused.
He argued that oppression and abuse of the court process were seen in the prosecution being allowed to amend the 1MDB audit report tampering charge against Najib, among others.
On June 24, the court allowed the prosecution’s application to amend the charge against Najib as it ruled he would not suffer from any prejudice or injustice due to the amendment.
“There can be an abuse of (court) process, so it (the striking out bid) is to safeguard the accused from oppression or prejudice.
“This court has jurisdiction to either strike out or stay the charge in order to prevent the abuse from continuing.
“We say there is a serious defect in the charge, making the charge groundless,” Shafee submitted.
Shafee then made reference to the witness statements of three prosecution witnesses that he claimed bolstered the notion that there was no case against Najib and thus the charge should be struck out.
The prosecution witnesses were namely former auditor-general Ambrin Buang, former National Audit Department (NAD) director Saadatul Nafisah Bashir Ahmad and NAD staff Nor Salwani Muhammad.
Zaini then asked Shafee about why the defence was taking the striking out route now when it could instead wait for the prosecution to finish its case (with the defence being allowed to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses).
The judge pointed out that if the defence waited, they could then see if the court made a ruling on whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case against Najib.
Shafee replied that the court had the judicial power to not only wait for the prosecution to close its case, but also to decide whether to allow the defence bid to strike out the charge.
In reply, lead DPP Gopal Sri Ram submitted that there was a very high threshold to be met before an accused could be said to have been oppressed or suffer from an abuse of the court process.
The former federal court judge argued that an accused being merely being hit with a charge cannot be said to have been oppressed.
“Oppression must be something more than a mere bringing of a charge (against the accused). It (must) involve the surrounding circumstances around the charge,” Sri Ram said among others.
Earlier, at the start of proceedings this morning, Najib was seen sitting in the dock as Shafee was about to start submitting for the defence.
Zaini noticed Najib in the dock and asked Shafee what was the mode of the striking out application, to which Shafee replied it was via a notice of motion.
“This is a (hearing of a) notice of motion so there is no need for your client to be sitting in the dock,” the judge informed Shafee as today was not set to hear the main trial of the 1MDB audit report tampering case.
The veteran lawyer then spoke briefly to Najib after which the accused exited the dock and took a seat in the front row of the public gallery.
The main audit report tampering trial against Najib and co-accused, former 1MDB CEO K Arul Kanda, is set to resume on July 27.
Najib is charged with using his position to order amendments to the 1MDB final audit report before it was presented to the Public Accounts Committee to avoid action being taken against him.
Arul Kanda is charged with abetting Najib in making the amendments to the report.
Both of them are charged under Section 23 (1) of the MACC Act 2009 which specifies a jail term not exceeding 20 years and a fine of no less than five times the amount of gratification or RM10,000, whichever is higher.
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.