KUALA LUMPUR (March 29): The prosecution in the forfeiture hearing related to the Pavilion condo raid three years ago submitted today that former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak had given inconsistent answers when asked about the source of the RM114 million cash seized in the raid.

Najib had claimed that the cash, comprising mainly of foreign currencies, is political donations belonging to Umno, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Liew Horng Bin submitted in the High Court.

He said the former Umno president, in his police report, had failed to disclose the contributor's identity while the party claimed that it was a political donation.

“Najib maintained in his police report as well as in this present third party hearing that the cash seized belongs to Umno. Yet, in his statement recorded under Section 32 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds from Unlawful Activity Act 2001 (AMLATFPUA), he disclosed that the foreign currencies were balance from his overseas travels.

“The contradictory versions mean that Najib has either utilised Umno monies for his personal overseas trips, which is an offence of criminal breach of trust, or there is simply no truth in his averments as contained in the police report and the current proceedings.

“The flip flop answers given by Najib in his witness statement, his police report and the affidavits filed for the present hearing in relation to the cash seized only point to the irresistible inference that the cash seized being proceeds from unlawful activities,” he said.

Liew, who appeared with DPPs Saifuddin Hashim Musaimi, Harris Ong Jeffrey Ong and Faten Hadni Khairuddin, said the court can thus safely infer that these monies are proceeds from unlawful activities linked to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), and the government has the right to seize them.

The DPP said this in reply to Najib's counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah — along with Umno lawyers Datuk Hariharan Singh Tara Singh and Tania Scivetti — who had contested the claim that the monies seized during the highly publicised raid at the condo belonging to OBYU Holdings Sdn Bhd, are owned by the party.

OBYU Holdings is owned by Najib's close associate Tan Sri Bustari Yusuf, the elder brother of Works Minister Datuk Seri Fadillah Yusof.

Last month, the prosecution had contended that the former premier and finance minister had allegedly received a total of US$971 million (RM2.973 billion), said to be 1MDB's money, from 2011 to March 2013, and that the money seized from the condo were part of the illicit funds.

The monies were received in several stages — Good Star stage (US$120 million via five transactions between 2011 and 2012), Aabar stage (US$170 million via six transactions in 2012) and Tanore stage (three transfers in March 2013).

Besides the money, the raid also yielded close to 12,000 pieces of jewellery that included a tiara, rings, necklaces and others, valuable watches and expensive handbags. The forfeiture of these other items will be heard before Justice Datuk Muhammad Jamil Hussin at separate proceedings, as this third party contest last month and today is squarely on the RM114 million cash.

Large amounts of cash means illegal

Liew further contended that the large amounts of cash seized during the raid could only mean that it was illegal money, "as who would bring such amounts of money, which can be easily used if it wasn't illegal money".

The cash, Liew noted, were placed in 35 luggage bags in a combination of ringgit and various other currencies and denominations as affirmed by investigating officers Senior Assistant Commissioner R Rajagopal and Superintendent Foo Wei Min.

The DPP also pointed out that one of Najib's aides had divulged in his statement that approximately RM25 to RM35 million cash was brought out of the former premier's office after the 14th General Election, but there were no records of cash received or spent, despite him saying that the money belonged to Umno or Barisan Nasional.

“There was no evidence about the balance of cash in foreign currencies which made up RM114 million. This witness only accounted for RM25 to RM35 million. Surely one would question where Najib got the money from,” he said.

He added that the prosecution had shown the money trail over monies entering into Najib's 9694 AmBank account and then when it was closed, it was diverted to account 1880, and two further AmIslamic accounts were also opened (1906 and 1898) and were used for the payouts received from various politicians and others.

“Umno and its politicians are the main beneficiaries of the fraud perpetrated by 1MDB,” the DPP said.

“For these reasons, the prosecution has shown that on a balance of probabilities the cash seized should be forfeited and the application for a pecuniary order against Najib and Umno be allowed,” he said.

No need to name Najib

Liew also said there is no need to name Najib as a respondent in the forfeiture application although he was shown the search list.

He argued that if Najib insisted that he be named as the respondent instead of OBYU Holdings, he should have applied to intervene and not do so via this third party proceedings.

“There is strictly no prohibition in law for him to do so. He has not resorted to an intervention application. There is therefore no ground for him to complain,” Liew said.

Umno and Shafee had said that the prosecution had wrongly named OBYU Holdings, instead of Najib, as the respondent, noting that there are no present proceedings against the company.

Justice Jamil fixed May 20 to deliver his decision on the contest by Najib and Umno to get back the money.

He also said that if the parties wish to file additional written submissions, they should do so by April 12, and the court will see whether a date will be needed for clarifications to be sorted out, before he delivers his decision.

Get the latest news @ www.EdgeProp.my

Subscribe to our Telegram channel for the latest stories and updates 

Click here for more property stories

SHARE
RELATED POSTS
  1. Landowner secures appeal to call four witnesses in Penang 1MDB suit on Air Itam estate
  2. PAC told no more govt assets will be sold to repay 1MDB debts
  3. Property tycoon Lim Soon Peng settles suit by SRC International