Prosecution Wraps Up Submissions, Labels Najib Orchestrator Of 1MDB Crimes

PUTRAJAYA, Oct 30 (Bernama) -- The prosecution in the trial of Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, accused of misappropriating RM2.3 billion from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), today asserted that the former prime minister was not a victim but the principal architect of his own criminal conduct.

Deputy public prosecutor (DPP) Datuk Ahmad Akram Gharib submitted that the evidence revealed that Najib was not wronged by others, but instead systematically used others to execute his bidding, and now seeks to evade the legal consequences of his own actions. 

"The accused was not the victim; he was the orchestrator. He was not the victim of other men’s crimes. He was the architect of those crimes. The individuals he now labels as culprits have been shown to have acted on his orders, through his office, and for his benefit.

“The accused paints himself as a victim of rogue subordinates, when in truth, he was the single most powerful decision-maker in Malaysia as well as in 1MDB during the material time. The accused wielded absolute executive, financial and political control. 

“The Board, management and officers of 1MDB operated under his direction. He cannot now shift blame to those beneath him when his own approval, his own office, and his own accounts were at the centre of the transactions,” he submitted. 

Ahmad Akram further contended that the evidence demonstrated that every individual the accused had blamed was acting either on his direct instructions or with his explicit approval. He emphasised that as subordinates, these individuals were bound to follow directives issued by the Prime Minister, transmitted either personally or through his intermediary, Low Taek Jho (Jho Low).

“The evidence demonstrates that the accused was not an uninvolved superior but the originator, director, and ultimate beneficiary of the schemes in question,” he added.

He emphasised that the prosecution's case, supported by documentary evidence, established that no 1MDB project or venture could proceed without the accused's prior approval, and that every major corporate document bore his signature or endorsement.

“Evidence from AmBank and the prosecution’s 47th witness, Bank Negara Malaysia analyst Adam Ariff Mohd Roslan, clearly traces large sums of monies into the accused’s personal bank accounts. 

“These funds originated from companies that were vehicles controlled by fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho or Jho Low, and not the Saudi Royal family, as claimed. The accused personally used and directed the expenditure of these funds for his personal and political purposes,” he said.

Meanwhile,  DPP Mohamad Mustafa P Kunyalam described the 1MDB case as bizarre, noting that if everything had been managed strictly according to corporate standards, “we wouldn’t be here, and the funds wouldn’t have flowed elsewhere or ended up in the accused’s bank account”.

He asserted that the mismanagement of the company's affairs was not accidental but deliberate, emphasising that rather than distancing himself from Jho Low, Najib had instead entrenched the fugitive businessman in both his personal and official dealings.

“The only reasonable inference is that Jho Low functioned as the accused’s conduit, proxy and indispensable facilitator in the affairs of 1MDB. Now we can ask — what action was taken against Jho Low in 2009?

“The answer is none. It went on and on until 2018, when he lost power. Not a single action was taken against Jho Low. But the then Attorney-General (AG) Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail was removed in 2015, at the height of this fiasco,” he said.

Meanwhile, DPP Datuk Kamal Baharin Omar, addressing the 21 money laundering charges, argued that Najib's reliance on Jho Low and unverified Saudi donation letters demonstrated "wilful blindness."

He contended that the massive inflows—RM155 million, RM304 million and RM602 million—into Najib's personal account demanded scrutiny, yet the accused deliberately avoided verifying their legitimacy.

“As Prime Minister and Finance Minister at the material time, he had a duty to verify, but chose not to. The scale, offshore layering and lack of credible donation evidence prove conscious avoidance, which in law amounts to knowledge.

“By deliberately shutting his eyes, the accused satisfied the test of ‘reason to believe’ under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing, and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLATFA).

“The accused claimed he acted in good faith and used the funds for political and social purposes, but under AMLATFA, intent is irrelevant — it suffices that he knew or had reason to believe the funds were proceeds of unlawful activity. Good faith use cannot cleanse tainted money,” said Kamal Baharin.

The court also heard submissions from DPP Deepa Nair Thevaharan, who argued that the defence has, to date, failed to produce any evidence establishing the authenticity of the purported Arab donation letters.

“The only material before the court is oral testimony, speculative in nature, premised on the accused’s own assumption that the funds were an Arab donation. This assertion is entirely unsupported by any credible or corroborative evidence.

“Furthermore, the witnesses called by the defence to attest to the letter’s authenticity also failed to produce any documentary proof to substantiate their claims,” she said.

The prosecution concluded its oral submissions today. The defence team for Najib is scheduled to complete its replies tomorrow before Judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah.

On May 6, Najib’s defence concluded its case after calling 26 witnesses, and the court set nine days starting Oct 21 for oral submissions.

Najib, 72, faces 25 charges, including four counts of abusing his position to accept RM2.3 billion in bribes from 1MDB funds and 21 charges of money laundering involving the same amount.

Najib is currently serving his sentence in Kajang Prison for the misappropriation of RM42 million from SRC International Sdn Bhd. 

-- BERNAMA