KUALA LUMPUR, July 27 — Tan Sri Ali Hamsa said in court that he had highlighted topics for the auditor-general to consider removing or amending in the latter’s 2016 audit report on 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) based on “talking points” he said were from the Prime Minister’s Office.

Ali, who was the chief secretary to the government in February 2016, was testifying as the fourth prosecution witness in the joint trial of former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and former 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda Kandasamy over the alleged tampering of the audit report on 1MDB.

Today, under cross-examination by Arul Kanda’s lawyer Datuk N. Sivananthan, Ali confirmed he never read the 1MDB audit report before he chaired a February 24, 2016 meeting. 

The 1MDB audit report was amended after the coordination meeting involving 1MDB’s Arul Kanda and top government officials including Auditor-General Tan Sri Ambrin Buang.

Advertisement

Ali confirmed that he went into the February 24 meeting without knowing in detail the issues to be highlighted regarding the audit report, saying that he only had a “general idea” based on what he was told during a February 22 meeting at the Prime Minister’s Office.

Ali had previously testified that he was called to the Prime Minister’s Office on February 22, 2016 where he met with Najib and Ambrin, noting that Najib had expressed his dissatisfaction with the 1MDB audit report and that Najib had asked for the report to omit mention of 1MDB having two different versions of its financial statement for the year 2014.

Ali today said he could not recall how long this meeting was, but said it was long enough for him to understand some of the general issues that were being highlighted.

Advertisement

Today, Sivananthan countered that Ali appeared to be the one who was bringing up issues to be highlighted during the February 24 meeting based on a transcript of an audio recording of the meeting, questioning how Ali knew what were the issues to be discussed for amendment.

Ali then replied that he was just reading off several sheets of “talking points” that were prepared for him and placed in front of him by his senior private secretary Datuk Norazman Ayob before the meeting started.

“It’s just a written note to ask questions on what are the issues to be raised.

“It was on my table when I arrived in the meeting room. It was given by the PMO,” Ali said, further adding however that he was uncertain if the talking points placed by his secretary on his table came from 1MDB or Najib’s principal private secretary Tan Sri Shukry Mohd Salleh.

Ali said these talking points which were typed out had specified the pages and the paragraphs of content to be raised during the February 24 meeting, confirming that this document had was the guideline or guide for him to raise issues to be discussed.

Sivananthan: These papers, you said came from the PMO’s office, all these issues to be raised, do you have any idea where those papers are today?

Ali: It was destroyed.

Ali also said that no one else received a copy of the talking points that were placed on his table before the meeting started, confirming that he had never seen the papers until he sat down for the meeting.

The February 24, 2016 meeting eventually resulted in the removal of four items from the auditor-general’s audit report on 1MDB, including mention of the existence of 1MDB’s two conflicting financial statements for the financial year 2014.

Today, Arul Kanda’s lawyer Sivananthan quizzed Ali on the role played by Najib’s then principal private secretary Tan Sri Shukry Mohd Salleh in meetings related to the bid to amend the 1MDB audit report, when Shukry was neither the auditor nor the auditee.

Sivananthan questioned why Shukry had made comments about 1MDB matters during the February 24 meeting when he has nothing to do with 1MDB.

Ali said he had “no answer” on why Shukry was allowed to make comments despite having nothing to do with the 1MDB audit, further confirming that he had not stopped Shukry from speaking during the meeting.

Sivananthan: Can I take it you didn’t stop him because he is from PMO?

Ali: Yes.

Ali said he had after the February 22 meeting decided on who to attend the February 24 coordination meeting, with Arul Kanda included as 1MDB’s CEO. Ali said Shukry was also among those invited as he wanted the PMO to be represented.

As for a February 23, 2016 meeting involving Shukry and Ambrin at Ali’s office, Ali indicated that Shukry’s expression of urgency had prompted him to call this meeting. Ali said Shukry had in the February 23 meeting spoken of how the 1MDB audit report had turned into a crisis that needed to be handled immediately, but noted that Shukry did not go into the specifics of the report.

While agreeing that Shukry was neither an auditee nor had anything to do with 1MDB, Ali said that Shukry had wanted to have earlier discussion as he was one of the invitees for the February 24 coordination meeting.

When asked if Shukry was the “voice for the prime minister” in his capacity then as Najib’s principal private secretary, Ali said “could be”. Ali further confirmed that Shukry would normally carry out the instructions of the prime minister but said he could not be sure if Shukry approached him on his own regarding the 1MDB audit report or if he was instructed to do so.

Ali said he had specifically asked for Arul Kanda as the 1MDB CEO then to be present at the February 24 coordination meeting as he was representing 1MDB which was being audited, agreeing that Arul Kanda was the right person to attend the meeting and speak on behalf of the auditee 1MDB in response to issues raised in the audit report.

Ali agreed that Arul Kanda could make suggestions or say what he wanted during the February 24 meeting but that it was ultimately the auditor-general who decides if requests for amendment or for the dropping of details were reasonable or unreasonable.

Ali said that Arul Kanda had “defended the interests” of 1MDB during the February 24 meeting as the person in charge of 1MDB, further agreeing that the then 1MDB CEO had not touched on the political impact of the 1MDB audit report but had instead limited himself to just factual issues.

Ali also agreed that the then 1MDB president’s role was to put things into perspective and correct matters in the 1MDB audit report.

Sivananthan, who took less than two hours for his cross-examination of Arul Kanda, later confirmed to reporters that this was the first time that he was cross-examining a prosecution witness in full.

Sivananthan had previously asked two prosecution witnesses — Ambrin and government auditor Nor Salwani Muhammad — brief questions, but had subsequently this January reserved his right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses to prevent putting Arul Kanda in a compromising position if he were to be called to testify as a prosecution witness in this case.

Today, Sivananthan confirmed that the prosecution has yet to call Arul Kanda as a prosecution witness despite the prosecution indicating this possibility on the first day of trial, adding that he has decided to cross-examine all prosecution witnesses until his client is called to testify for the prosecution.

“I want to establish the fact that calling him as a witness is probably the right thing to do on the facts, especially confirmed by the witness today that his role there was purely as an auditee providing information, no other function at the meeting. So I think we will still continue with the cross-examination of witnesses to reiterate his role,” Sivananthan told reporters, adding that he wants to fortify that having Arul Kanda become a prosecution witness is a “correct decision”.

In this trial, Najib is facing the charge of having abused his position as prime minister and finance minister by ordering for changes to the auditor-general’s audit report on 1MDB before the report was presented to Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee to avoid any civil or criminal action against him in relation to his role in 1MDB’s company operations, while Arul Kanda was charged with abetting Najib in the report’s tampering.

The trial before High Court judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan resumes this Wednesday, where Najib’s lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah is expected to continue cross-examining Ali after having grilled him previously.

Shafee did not appear in court today as he was not feeling well and had received a medical certificate, his fellow defence lawyer Syahirah Hanapiah said.