Rosmah: I was framed by ‘unsatisfactory’ ex-aide Rizal Mansor, other prosecution witnesses

Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor is pictured at the Kuala Lumpur High Court October 7, 2021. Rosmah today maintained that the corruption charges against her were the product of a ‘conspiracy’. ― Picture by Miera Zulyana
Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor is pictured at the Kuala Lumpur High Court October 7, 2021. Rosmah today maintained that the corruption charges against her were the product of a ‘conspiracy’. ― Picture by Miera Zulyana

Follow us on Instagram and subscribe to our Telegram channel for the latest updates.


KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 7 — Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor today maintained that the corruption charges against her were the product of a “conspiracy” among several prosecution witnesses along with the trial’s prosecutors, the High Court heard today.

However, Rosmah was unable to provide further details as to why several prosecution witnesses, as mentioned in her defence statement yesterday, wanted to frame her for their alleged corrupt acts in relation to the awarding of the RM1.25 billion solar hybrid project, during cross-examination by senior public prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram.

The prosecution witnesses in question are former education minister Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid, former education secretary-generals Tan Sri Madinah Mohamad and Datuk Seri Alias Ahmad, along with Rosmah’s former aide, Datuk Rizal Mansor, and Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd Managing director Saidi Abang Samsudin.

Sri Ram had asked Rosmah whether she had any disagreements or arguments with all the aforementioned parties, to which she said no.

She also denied knowing Saidi and his business partner, Rayyan Radzwill Abdullah, personally and maintained that she had only met them through her former aide, Rizal.

Sri Ram then pressed Rosmah whether she could provide an explanation as to why all of these witnesses would “concoct false statements” in court and frame her for their alleged crime, as posited in her defence statement. 

Rosmah responded that the prosecution should instead direct such questions to these witnesses instead. 

Her lawyer, Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader, then interjected Sri Ram’s line of questioning, stating that it was unfair to request his client to provide answers which she had no personal knowledge or opinion-based replies of.

Zooming in on her statement that Rizal had allegedly conspired with the Attorney General’s Chambers to draw up false charges against her, Sri Ram then called up all eight members of the prosecution team, who are assisting with the trial, to introduced themselves to Rosmah and questioned whether she had any disagreements with any of them personally, to which she answered no.

Sri Ram then suggested to Rosmah that her insistence that Rizal had conspired with the prosecution hold no basis, to which she disagreed.

Rosmah also maintained under cross-examination that she does not have a close relationship with her former aide, Rizal, and that he was an “unsatisfactory” employee.

Rosmah explained that she instead preferred to communicate her grievances, if any, with FLOM head of department and Rizal’s immediate superior, Datuk Seri Siti Azizah Sheikh Abod, and again reiterated that she was not involved in any administrative matters within the department.

Sri Ram then asked Rosmah who had endorsed Rizal for him to receive his Datukship from the Pahang state government, to which she explained she merely mentioned Rizal’s name to the chief secretary of the Pahang state government but stressed that she had no power to influence the award process.

“I pity him (Rizal), that is why I mentioned his name, but whether he had also submitted the application through other people I do not know,’’ said Rosmah.

However, Rosmah affirmed a question by Sri Ram when asked whether her position as the prime minister’s wife could have influenced Rizal’s receiving his Datukship.

You May Also Like

Related Articles