This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily on December 4, 2019

KUALA LUMPUR: Lead defence counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has stated that the core of the defence’s case in proving Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s innocence will be on the fact that the former prime minister had no knowledge and no involvement in matters that resulted in the transaction of RM42 million from SRC International Sdn Bhd into his accounts.

In his opening speech outlining the defence’s case in the High Court yesterday, Muhammad Shafee said that his team will also prove that the surrounding circumstances had led Najib to believe that fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho, or Jho Low, was a close associate of the royal family of Saudi Arabia.

In relation to this, the team will also prove that the monies Najib received from 2011 to 2014 were in fact donations from King Abdullah Abdul Aziz Al-Saud.

The defence also defended Najib’s innocence as he was made to understand that — throughout the period of 2011 to 2015 — matters relating to the opening of his corporate social responsibility (CSR) accounts, and the remittances into the accounts, had been duly reported to Bank Negara Malaysia and its former governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz.

As such, Najib had no reason to believe that anything sinister was taking place in the accounts.

Muhammed Shafee also justified that Najib’s utilisation of the funds from the accounts from 2011 to 2015 were almost all for CSR-related matters to promote political, social and charitable causes as well as community-related projects.

The amount utilised for personal matters was minimal and in any event was done in the belief that the monies could be utilised by Najib as he deemed fit, according to Muhammad Shafee.

Therefore, the lawyer argued that Najib never intended to wrongfully gain or enrich himself with any of those funds, and never intended to cause wrongful harm to any party.

In proving the defence’s case, the team will produce additional evidence, including secretarial documents and records of SRC as well as a meeting between Najib and King Abdullah.

The defence submitted that with the evidence, they will establish that Najib had in fact acted in the best interest of the country with regard to matters involving SRC.

It will also establish that there was no misuse of office and no corrupt arrangement in which gratification was offered, solicited or caused to be received by Najib.

Furthermore, the evidence will prove that Najib was never an “agent” or “director” of SRC in control of the company and certainly not entrusted with dominion over funds of SRC either directly or indirectly.

The defence contended that the prosecution had failed to establish the predicate offences and as such could not prove that the RM42 million was derived from illegal activities.

Consequently, the defence argued, the circumstances would justify that there were reasonable excuses for Najib to believe that the funds in his accounts were not proceeds of illegal activity.

Muhammad Shafee also said that the clear impetus behind Kumpulan Wang Persaraan (Diperbadankan) or Retirement Fund (Incorporated) (KWAP) and the government’s endorsement of intended activities of SRC, and the need for SRC to be adequately funded through KWAP loans, “was based on the intended activities of SRC promulgating national key development areas identified in the 10th Malaysia Plan and the New Energy Policy”.

“This was the justification that underscored the decisions of the Economic Planning Unit (EPU), KWAP, the ministry of finance and the Cabinet from the time the EPU approved the setting up of SRC up to the time the Cabinet approved the second government guarantee on Feb 8, 2012, and the ministry of finance’s request for and KWAP’s approval of a further RM2 billion loan to be disbursed to SRC.

“To say otherwise would be to unreasonably imply and infer that the relevant decision makers, including the head of the Treasury, relevant ministers, members of the Investment Panel of KWAP and members of the Cabinet, had committed a dereliction of their public, statutory and/or constitutional duties,” the lawyer added.

Muhammad Shafee said the decision to bring SRC directly under Minister of Finance Inc (MoF Inc) was approved by Najib after deliberations between the EPU minister and the ministry of finance, and was based on recommendations of the MoF Inc Department (BMKD) which oversees the affairs of MoF Inc.

“The added supervision of SRC by BMKD was envisaged as being in the best interest of MKD (MoF Inc) and the government of Malaysia. The same was endorsed by the Cabinet as one of the basis for granting the second government guarantee on Feb 8, 2012,” Muhammad Shafee said.

“Najib at all times had no personal interest in SRC which can be said to be conflicted with his public duty,” the lawyer added. “These acts of Najib were motivated only by the best interest of the government of Malaysia.”

In conclusion, Muhammad Shafee said, the defence called for Najib to be acquitted and discharged of all of the seven charges against him in the SRC trial.