Lawyer claims Najib denied fair trial; alleges MACC’s 1MDB probe was shoddy, biased and incomplete
Former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is pictured in a wheelchair at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Complex on September 18, 2024. Picture by Yusof Mat Isa
Wednesday, 18 Sep 2024 2:17 PM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 18 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was denied the right to fair trial in his trial over 1Malaysia Development Berhad’s (1MDB) RM2.2 billion funds, as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had allegedly carried out a biased and shoddy investigation against him, his lawyer claimed today.
Najib’s lawyer Wan Azwan Aiman Wan Fakhruddin today argued that MACC’s investigating officer Senior Superintendent Nur Aida Arifin’s investigation on his client’s 1MDB case was “biased, selective, shoddy and incomplete”.
In the High Court, Wan Azwan Aiman claimed that the alleged shoddy investigation had deprived Najib of his “constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair investigation and fair trial”.
The lawyer argued Nur Aida’s investigation was biased, as he claimed there was a “predetermined intention” to bring Najib to court and press charges against him regardless of the 1MDB investigation’s outcome.
In making this argument, the lawyer cited the MACC investigator’s August 28, 2018 submission of the investigation paper and the proposed charges to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) and the AGC’s September 19, 2018 granting of consent to charge Najib.
The lawyer said both those events took place before Najib’s statement to the MACC under Section 53(3) of the MACC Act 2009 was completed on September 20, 2018 at 8.10am.
“I must remind Yang Arif, this court again, that 20 September 2018 was also the date on which Datuk Seri Najib was brought to court to be charged.
“When the investigation papers were brought to AGC for their consideration, Datuk Seri Najib’s statement under Section 53 did not form part of that consideration for the charges to be levelled against him. Naturally his explanation was also not reduced in writing to be considered by the AGC, Yang Arif,” he argued.
“When cross-examined, Nur Aida confirmed our suspicion that Datuk Seri Najib was charged in court on the very same day, in fact immediately after they had finished recording the statement.
“And she also confirmed that consent to prosecute was issued a day before they finished recording Datuk Seri Najib’s statement,” he later said.
He argued that this showed that the recording of Najib’s MACC statement was “treated as nothing more than a mere formality and a purely administrative task”.
Stressing that the AGC’s issuing of the consent to charge Najib was issued before the MACC finished recording his statement, Wan Azwan Aiman claimed that there was a “flaw” in Najib’s statement to the MACC.
The lawyer also claimed the investigation was biased as Najib was not alerted about the possible charges that he may face when the MACC recorded his statement.
The lawyer said it is a requirement under the MACC Act’s Section 53(3) for notice to be given to an individual of the charges which they would be prosecuted with.
He said such notice of the potential charges was necessary to allow an accused person to have a fair opportunity to answer the allegations against him and to prevent his defence from being labelled as an “afterthought”.
“Datuk Seri Najib has not been alerted to the section to which he is being investigated for and to which he is supposed to be charged. Bearing in mind, charges have been drafted and consent has been issued, so what is the problem of alerting Datuk Seri Najib to the charges or at least to the section for which he is to be charged,” he said.
He also claimed Najib was deprived of a right to fair trial as the MACC’s Nur Aida allegedly did not carry out a thorough investigation on Najib’s defence in the 1MDB case.
“Her investigation therefore could not be said to be satisfactory, complete, judicious and fair,” he argued, also claiming that her investigation was focused on establishing Najib’s guilt.
Among other things, Wan Azwan Aiman cited past court decisions stating that investigation should be carried out impartially and also be focused on evidence that favours an accused person, and not just on evidence that point to the accused person’s guilt.
Najib, who was in a wheelchair and was on sick leave for four days last week due to pain in his right knee, was seen seated outside the accused’s dock on a chair with a cane.
Najib’s 1MDB trial before judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah resumes this afternoon.
Wednesday, 18 Sep 2024 2:17 PM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 18 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was denied the right to fair trial in his trial over 1Malaysia Development Berhad’s (1MDB) RM2.2 billion funds, as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had allegedly carried out a biased and shoddy investigation against him, his lawyer claimed today.
Najib’s lawyer Wan Azwan Aiman Wan Fakhruddin today argued that MACC’s investigating officer Senior Superintendent Nur Aida Arifin’s investigation on his client’s 1MDB case was “biased, selective, shoddy and incomplete”.
In the High Court, Wan Azwan Aiman claimed that the alleged shoddy investigation had deprived Najib of his “constitutionally-guaranteed right to a fair investigation and fair trial”.
The lawyer argued Nur Aida’s investigation was biased, as he claimed there was a “predetermined intention” to bring Najib to court and press charges against him regardless of the 1MDB investigation’s outcome.
In making this argument, the lawyer cited the MACC investigator’s August 28, 2018 submission of the investigation paper and the proposed charges to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) and the AGC’s September 19, 2018 granting of consent to charge Najib.
The lawyer said both those events took place before Najib’s statement to the MACC under Section 53(3) of the MACC Act 2009 was completed on September 20, 2018 at 8.10am.
“I must remind Yang Arif, this court again, that 20 September 2018 was also the date on which Datuk Seri Najib was brought to court to be charged.
“When the investigation papers were brought to AGC for their consideration, Datuk Seri Najib’s statement under Section 53 did not form part of that consideration for the charges to be levelled against him. Naturally his explanation was also not reduced in writing to be considered by the AGC, Yang Arif,” he argued.
“When cross-examined, Nur Aida confirmed our suspicion that Datuk Seri Najib was charged in court on the very same day, in fact immediately after they had finished recording the statement.
“And she also confirmed that consent to prosecute was issued a day before they finished recording Datuk Seri Najib’s statement,” he later said.
He argued that this showed that the recording of Najib’s MACC statement was “treated as nothing more than a mere formality and a purely administrative task”.
Stressing that the AGC’s issuing of the consent to charge Najib was issued before the MACC finished recording his statement, Wan Azwan Aiman claimed that there was a “flaw” in Najib’s statement to the MACC.
The lawyer also claimed the investigation was biased as Najib was not alerted about the possible charges that he may face when the MACC recorded his statement.
The lawyer said it is a requirement under the MACC Act’s Section 53(3) for notice to be given to an individual of the charges which they would be prosecuted with.
He said such notice of the potential charges was necessary to allow an accused person to have a fair opportunity to answer the allegations against him and to prevent his defence from being labelled as an “afterthought”.
“Datuk Seri Najib has not been alerted to the section to which he is being investigated for and to which he is supposed to be charged. Bearing in mind, charges have been drafted and consent has been issued, so what is the problem of alerting Datuk Seri Najib to the charges or at least to the section for which he is to be charged,” he said.
He also claimed Najib was deprived of a right to fair trial as the MACC’s Nur Aida allegedly did not carry out a thorough investigation on Najib’s defence in the 1MDB case.
“Her investigation therefore could not be said to be satisfactory, complete, judicious and fair,” he argued, also claiming that her investigation was focused on establishing Najib’s guilt.
Among other things, Wan Azwan Aiman cited past court decisions stating that investigation should be carried out impartially and also be focused on evidence that favours an accused person, and not just on evidence that point to the accused person’s guilt.
Najib, who was in a wheelchair and was on sick leave for four days last week due to pain in his right knee, was seen seated outside the accused’s dock on a chair with a cane.
Najib’s 1MDB trial before judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah resumes this afternoon.
The evidence against Najib is massive and mountainous. .
ReplyDelete