Rosmah is accused of soliciting RM187.5 million from Saidi through Rizal as an inducement to help Jepak Holdings secure the solar project for 369 rural schools in Sarawak, costing RM1.25 billion, through direct negotiation with the education ministry.
She is also charged with two counts of receiving bribes amounting to RM6.5 million – RM1.5 million from Saidi at her private residence at Langgak Duta here on Sept 7, 2017, and another RM5 million from Saidi through Rizal at Seri Perdana in Putrajaya on Dec 20, 2016.
Thursday, 31 Dec 2020 04:54 PM MYT
KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 31 – A fictitious agreement was used to cover-up the payment of the bribes from former managing director of Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd, Saidi Abang Samsudin, to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, said the prosecution.
The prosecution, led by senior deputy public prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram said, the purpose of the said agreement was to ‘regularise’ the bribe that Rosmah would receive.
“The object was to prepare an agreement to conceal the true nature of the payment by Saidi, who is the 17th prosecution witness, to the accused. The euphemism ‘consultancy’ was used to mask the payment of the bribe,” said the prosecution in its written submission filed at the High Court here, on Tuesday (Dec 29).
No proof to show Rosmah solicited, received bribes, says defence
V Anbalagan – December 30, 2020 10:47 AM
KUALA LUMPUR: Rosmah Mansor did not personally solicit and accept bribes from then Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd managing director Saidi Abang Samsudin, her defence lawyers said, arguing that the wife of former prime minister Najib Razak should be acquitted as the prosecution had failed to prove their case.
In a 212-page submission by lawyers Jagjit Singh, Akberdin Abdul Kadir and Azrul Zulkifli Stork, they said it was Saidi who intended and offered the money as political donation to Rosmah.
“The political donation was meant for Najib as a ‘gesture of gratitude’ for supporting their application by Jepak to secure the solar project and ensure Barisan Nasional’s victory in the 14th general election,” they said in the submission filed at the High Court on Monday, sighted by FMT.
The lawyers said there was no evidence to show that Rosmah solicited any percentage of the contract value from Saidi or his then business partner, Rayyan Radzwill Abdullah, between January and April 2016.
“The political donation was the idea of Saidi and Rayyan,” they said, adding that both men and another prosecution witness, Rizal Mansor, had confirmed this during cross-examination.
The submission said Rizal, a former aide to Rosmah who turned prosecution witness after corruption charges against him were dropped, was using the accused’s name to solicit and receive bribes.
Her lawyers said Rosmah did not receive the RM1.5 million from Saidi as she was never shown nor handed over the amount.
“Nowhere (did) the prosecution witnesses confirm that the accused received the gratification sum,” they said, adding that Saidi only withdrew the RM1.5 million from a bank for his “personal use”.
Further, they said, there was no actual delivery of the money at Langgak Duta.
They also said the prosecution failed to prove that the alleged two black bags with orange stripes containing the RM1.5 million were personally handed over to Rosmah.
“Saidi never handed over the bags personally to the accused. He never said he put the cash on the table in front of her. He never opened, showed the bags and counted the notes in front of the accused,” they said.
They said Rizal, in his witness statement, claimed that Rosmah had instructed her butler to bring the two bags into her room, but “this evidence was not supported”.
“In fact, there was no attempt by the prosecution to call the butler to prove the allegation by Rizal.”
Further, they said, there was no evidence to prove that Rosmah received the other RM5 million in two luggage bags from Rizal at Seri Perdana through two butlers.
They said the prosecution failed to prove the so-called telephone conversation between Rizal and Rosmah at Pavilion in Kuala Lumpur, where Rosmah purportedly instructed Rizal to bring the cash to Seri Perdana.
“Moreover, even the investigating officer cannot confirm whether there was any call made by Rizal to the accused on the said date,” they said.
The counsel said Rizal made up a story alleging that there were two butlers at Seri Perdana who had picked up the two bags from him, which “the prosecution had failed to prove”.
The prosecution, they said, also failed to adduce CCTV recording or a visitor’s registration book at Seri Perdana to support Rizal’s claim.
“Even Saidi and Rayyan had expressed doubt whether Rizal had handed over the money to the accused,” they said.
They said Rizal’s testimony on dropping off a police escort at the Prime Minister’s Office minutes before reaching Seri Perdana was “illogical, bizarre and bordering on absurdity”.
“It leads to the fact that he (Rizal) was not telling the truth where he deliberately dropped off the police escort so that he can siphon off the RM5 million for himself.”
They said failure to call the police escort as a witness had created a material gap in the prosecution’s case.
The defence also said the prosecution failed to show credible and independent evidence that Rosmah solicited and received any of the corrupt money.