The judge asks what happened to the RM4b loan granted to SRC. Najib’s lawyer replies, “Nobody knows.”

0


PUTRAJAYA (April 8): An appellate court judge interviewed Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s attorney today about the status of the RM 4 billion loan granted by Retirement Fund Inc (KWAP) to SRC International Sdn Bhd in 2011 and 2012 White “.

Judge Datuk Vazeer Alam Mydin Meera put the question to attorney Harvinderjit Singh after questions were raised about the huge amounts KCAP had granted the SRC twice and which were immediately transferred out of the country.

“We only know that the sum of RM 2 billion was received in August 2011 and was paid out on the same day. Another RM 2 billion was also received and paid out in March 2012,” said Harvinderjit.

“We roughly know that RM 1.8 billion was transferred in the first instance and possibly in the second line for investment. What the status of the fund is now we do not know and there was no evidence in court or in court to say what the status is, “he said.

He added that the transfer of the money was not made through the SRC board.

“We don’t know who approved it (transferring the funds overseas). Every act of removing the RM 4 billion is theft. Saying it was theft is also difficult as no police report has been filed about the transfer of funds. We don’t know its status, ”said Harvinderjit.

In addition to Justice Vazeer, the other members of the bank are Justice Datuk Abdul Karim Abdul Jalil, who runs the bank, and Justice Datuk Has Zanah Mehat.

It was previously reported that the transfer of funds was made through a secret SRC International account rather than the normal account. The signer of the secret account was former SRC executive Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil, who is now out of the country and wanted by the authorities.

Former chairman of SRC International, Tan Sri Ismee Ismail, testified in the High Court trial that he knew the account existed some time later after he was appointed to the board.

The judge of the court, Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, also referred to the matter in his judgment.

“It should also be mentioned that testimonies show that the majority of the RM 4 billion withdrawn by KWAP to SRC was transferred to accounts outside the country almost immediately after receipt and has now apparently been frozen by the competent authorities in Switzerland. The current status is not clarified in this process, ”he explained.

The second finance minister, Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah, testified during the trial that he had tried to recover the funds allegedly frozen in Switzerland, but was prevented from doing so by Najib.

SRC did not have a proper corporate structure

In response to another question from Bench about why a police report was not produced on the matter, Harvinderjit replied that only Ismee and former SRC director Datuk Suboh Md Yasin could provide the answer.

He informed the three-headed bank that SRC did not have a proper corporate structure when the bulk of the RM 4 billion loan was granted by KWAP.

The attorney added that there was no board of directors at the time, just Nik Faisal and someone else, but it would be wrong to call Najib ruler of this money and act as its agent for the criminal breach of trust fulfill .

Harvinderjit said it would also be wrong to refer to the former prime minister as a “shadow director” as classified under Section 402A of the Criminal Code, as Najib should not be viewed as an agent.

“Najib did not have a formal director role in the company. He was only present as a retired advisor to SRC because the government held shares or interests in the company (through the loan granted), ”he said.

The attorney stated that the definition of an agent includes “any company or other person who acts, or intends or intends or acts, for or on behalf of a company or other person, whether as an agent … or in any other capacity , either alone or together with another person and whether in their own name or in the name of their client or not “.

“The director includes any person who holds the position of director of a company, whatever the name, and includes any person who acts or gives instructions or instructions in a manner that directors of a company are accustomed to give or to act, and includes an assistant or assistant director, regardless of any deficiency in the appointment or qualification of that person, “as stated in Section 402A of the Criminal Code, he said.

Because of this, Harvinderjit said his client did not have a formal position as a director in the company and that it would be wrong for the prosecutor to accuse him under Section 409 of the Code.

“A shareholder can represent his interests, but the board of directors represents the interests of the entire company,” he added.

Harvinderjit also described the prosecution’s move to prosecute as selective prosecution as his client should not be held for misuse of money or criminal breach of trust as he was not responsible for transferring funds.

“The person or individuals who caused the money transfer are Low Taek Jho (Jho Low) and his staff, and he is still at large. The fact remains that prosecutors also admitted that they were indicting Nik Faisal and Jho Low had prepared for embezzlement but instead Najib was charged, “he added.

Najib was tried by the High Court on July 28 for abuse of power in approving KWAP’s RM 4 billion loan in 2011 and 2012 and a criminal breach of trust for RM 42 million of the company’s AmBank accounts found guilty. He was also found guilty of money laundering in relation to the RM 42 million.

Najib was sentenced to 12 years in prison and fined RM210 million, which he is currently appealing.

The hearing will continue on Monday (April 12th).

Also read:
Kit Siang evades questions from the attorney regarding the 2015 charges against Najib

The appeals court reminds Najib’s defense not to repeat earlier statements in the SRC case



Source link

Share.

About Author

Comments are closed.