KUALA LUMPUR (April 5): “That is his findings and his opinion" was how former attorney-general Tan Sri Mohamad Apandi Ali responded in the High Court today when pointed out that a judge had rejected his conclusion that a sum of RM2.6 billion received by former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak was a personal donation.
Apandi was testifying in his defamation suit against Lim Kit Siang over an article written by the veteran politician on May 6, 2019, in which he called for the former attorney-general to explain why he “aided and abetted in the 1MDB scandal”.
During the cross-examination, Lim's counsel Ramkarpal Singh cited the July 28, 2020 decision by Justice Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali to find Najib guilty of seven charges of abuse of power, criminal breach of trust and money laundering in relation to RM42 million belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd.
In particular, Ramkarpal cited two flow charts displayed by Apandi during a 2016 press conference, where Apandi said he was “satisfied” with the evidence that the RM2.6 billion received by Najib into his accounts was a personal donation from the Saudi Royal family.
Justice Nazlan, in his finding, had said “both the flow charts showed (that) the funds entering the accounts of the accused had originated from SRC, and not from any donation of the Saudi Royal family”.
Ramkarpal: That very document you had in your hands that day, Tan Sri, was found by a High Court judge to show that there was no donation. Are you aware of this?
Apandi: That is the High Court judge’s findings.
Ramkarpal: He has made a finding, where you appeared as a witness, and he has commented on your evidence — he basically rejected that evidence.
Apandi: Does he? I don’t know.
Ramkarpal: Yes. That is the effect of what he said, because you said those charts reflect a donation, and he is saying there is no such thing. In fact, he is saying the contrary.
Apandi: That is his findings and his opinion.
Ramkarpal also referred to a May 2018 Reuters report quoting Malaysian Anti-Corruption (MACC) Review Panel member Datuk Lim Chee Wee as saying that Apandi refused to investigate further, despite evidence suggesting Najib received directly or indirectly RM42 million from SRC, which was a unit of 1MDB at the material time.
The lawyer questioned as to why Apandi declined to comment when approached by Reuters for the article, to which Apandi said the evidence at the time suggested no wrongdoing, and that the allegation was not worth responding to.
“The panel did not give me any evidence,” said Apandi.
“It was not worth responding… they did not use the words ‘aided and abetted’,” he said. “They did not use the words ‘cover up’… that is why I did not respond,” he added.
Ramkarpal said that in order to challenge Apandi’s claim that he did not conspire in the 1MDB scandal, the defense has to challenge Apandi’s plea that evidence at the time pointed to donations from a Saudi royal family into Najib’s accounts.
He said this after Apandi’s lawyer M Visvanathan contended that the issue was not relevant to the trial, and the court should only be concerned with determining whether Lim’s article is defamatory or not.
Pointing to the absence of certain cited articles and even Justice Nazlan’s ruling in the initial submissions, Visvanathan described Ramkarpal's cross-examination as “trial by ambush” and a fishing expedition that pushes the limits and boundaries of the civil proceeding.
“I humbly submit that to confront the plaintiff in this manner is prejudicial and embarrassing,” said Visvanathan, before the trial was adjourned for tomorrow by Justice Datuk Azimah Omar.