This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly on March 9, 2020 - March 15, 2020

WHY were three lawyers present at King Abdullah’s Riyadh palace five years ago when officers from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) arrived to take a statement from Prince Saud Abdulaziz bin Majed bin Abdulaziz Al Saud (Al Saud) over four purported letters of donation signed by him relating to a US$681 million donation to Datuk Seri Najib Razak?

What were they doing at the palace on Nov 29, 2015 and who were they representing?

These pertinent questions were not asked and remain unanswered.

In any event, the three lawyers — Rishwant Singh, former deputy public prosecutor Francis Ng Aik Guan and MIC legal adviser Selva Mookiah — appeared quite at ease at the cavernous palace, MACC officer Fikri Ab Rahim indicated last week at Najib’s SRC International Sdn Bhd trial in connection with the money laundering of RM42 million belonging to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

Fikri, the 12th witness for the defence, said he did not know why Ng and Rishwant were present but Selva was there to represent Eric Tan Kim Loong — reportedly an ­associate of businessman Low Taek Jho, better known as Jho Low — who was present and whom the MACC initially wanted to arrest.

Tan was said to have facilitated the “donation” to Najib.

“Selva was there for Tan, as initially there were fears that the MACC may arrest him and he (Selva) was there to ensure that the arrangement made with the Attorney-General’s Chambers that there would be no arrests was complied with,” Fikri said.

But he told ad hoc prosecutor Datuk V Sithambaram he did not know why Ng or Rishwant were present although they seemed at ease at the palace, as though on familiar ground.

Sithambaram: For Ng Aik Guan and Rishwant Singh, who do they represent?

Fikri: I do not know.

Sithambaram: Is it normal, when statements are taken and confidentiality is of the utmost importance for the MACC, and yet you allowed them to be present?

Fikri: They (the lawyers) were present without having their statements taken.

Sithambaram: They were present and were inside the palace?

Fikri: Yes.

Sithambaram: Is there a possibility that Ng and Rishwant were there to represent Jho Low or Najib?

Fikri: I do not know.

Ng and Rishwant acted for Low

Previously, Ng and Rishwant were reported to have represented the Penang native in a suit filed by Datuk Seri Khairuddin Abu Hassan, a staunch ally of Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, against Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Low over the return of a pink diamond. In 2017, Khairuddin filed the suit seeking a court order for the return of the diamond — reportedly worth US$27.3 million — allegedly bought using 1MDB funds.

Khairuddin maintained that Low had committed theft or criminal breach of trust in utilising 1MDB funds to acquire the stone between June 2013 and March 2014, and that he had used Tan has an intermediary to purchase the diamond from Lorraine Schwartz in New York.

In that suit, Low appointed Ng as his lawyer but Khairuddin questioned whether the fugitive had in fact instructed Ng, given that the authorities said he could not be located. As there were questions surrounding Ng’s appointment, he could not make submissions, and Rishwant was roped in instead.

In any event, Khairuddin’s application to cross-examine Low regarding the pink diamond was dismissed.

In another case in 2016, Rishwant and senior lawyer Tan Sri Cecil Abraham had represented Najib in a civil suit filed by Mahathir and Khairuddin over 1MDB. However, the suit was eventually dismissed when the court ruled that a case cannot be brought against the prime minister as he is not a public officer but a member of the administration.

In the MACC interview, Low was not at the palace. But the MACC had recorded his statement at the Rosewood Hotel in Abu Dhabi on Nov 27, 2015, two days before the officers went to the palace.

According to Fikri and the previous defence witness — former 1MDB investigation officer Mohd Nasharuddin Amir — the MACC officers had only managed to record a statement from Tan and Al Saud’s legal aide, Mohammad Abdullah Al Koman, and not from the prince himself because of his purported “sovereign immunity”.

Whether Al Koman’s statement qualifies as Al Saud’s is unclear.

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's AppStore and Androids' Google Play.