1MDB trial judge says he’s been patient with Najib’s lawyers, urges them to save court time as defence seems to be ‘going in circles’

KUALA LUMPUR, March 22 — Lawyers defending former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak over the alleged misappropriation of more than RM2 billion of 1Malaysia Development Berhad’s (1MDB) funds appear to be going in circles in the trial, High Court judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah remarked in today’s hearing.

Lead prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram had earlier suggested that the questions by Najib’s lawyers were not relevant, and called for them to do better to save on court time.

Najib’s lawyer Datuk Hariharan Tara Singh was this morning cross-examining the 13th prosecution witness and former 1MDB director, Tan Sri Ismee Ismail, on various events that involve other 1MDB officials including former 1MDB CEO Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi. Shahrol had also testified as the ninth prosecution witness in this 1MDB trial over the course of around 40 days.

Just before the end of the morning session of today’s 1MDB trial, Sri Ram highlighted to the court: “I don’t see the relevance. I have been very patient, if it’s going to be suggested, all the documents put to him, there must be some relevance to the questions. So I will be very grateful if my learned friend can explain to us and His Lordship the relevance of questions which have already been put to Shahrol.”

Hariharan then sought to justify his questions to Ismee by saying that Najib’s lawyers wanted to show through this witness that Shahrol and former 1MDB official Casey Tang had taken intricate steps against the 1MDB board’s mandate, and argued that Shahrol had allegedly disputed many of the matters that Najib’s lawyers had asked of him.

Hariharan said Ismee as a former 1MDB board member would be independently representing the board in contrast to former 1MDB board member Shahrol.

Justice Sequerah then pointed out that this would be fine if Ismee is asked about what he knew: “But if he knows, if he has personal knowledge of whatever you ask him, that is well and good. But most of the things you put to him, he’s not aware of it.”

“I’m not stopping you from asking him, but can you ask him on things that are not already in documents before this court that can be the subject matter of submissions?” the judge asked.

Hariharan explained that all he wanted to show was how Shahrol and Casey had allegedly manipulated the whole scheme and how the 1MDB management had allegedly manipulated and deceived the 1MDB board, saying: “And we are asking the board’s comment and stand on it. That’s all I wanted to show --- independent person from the board.”

Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram arrives at the Kuala Lumpur High Court February 10, 2021. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon

Sri Ram emphasised that documents which are already part of the 1MDB trial as evidence could be matters which Najib’s lawyers could argue later on in their submissions, instead of having to spend time asking witnesses during court hearings.

“My response to that, it was all put to Shahrol, Shahrol gave his explanation. Documents were shown and Shahrol gave explanations, it’s for Your Lordship to decide at the end of the day whether Shahrol is a credible witness. What this witness is going to testify on what Shahrol did or did not do is wholly irrelevant, because they are already in documents which are capable of forming the subject matter of submissions.

“I just want to save the time of the court, it’s a total waste of exercise of materials before this court,” Sri Ram said.

The judge agreed with Sri Ramm saying: “I see Datuk Seri’s point. Because we seem to be going in circles.”

Lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah arrives at the Kuala Lumpur High Court March 21, 2022. — Picture by Shafwan Zaidon

Najib’s lead defence lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah then claimed that if the court finds that the 1MDB trial is going in circles, it would be because of how Shahrol and others put it that way to confuse everyone.

In response to the judge saying that Ismee may not be in a position to confirm matters asked, Shafee said: “If the witness is not in position, Yang Arif notice we won’t push him, but things he will be aware, we are hearing the perspective of a person who is not even close to having committed any wrong as opposed to Shahrol. As I have said over and over again, Shahrol should be charged, not the accused. We have to prove that particular point, that Shahrol is a character that cannot be believed.”

Over the past few days, Najib’s lawyers had ---- in cross-examining Ismee ---- sought to paint Shahrol as the one who had committed wrongdoings over 1MDB matters.

The judge then pointed out that it is for him to make an independent assessment of Shahrol’s credibility, but noted that most of the questions that Najib’s lawyers have been asking Ismee are already in documents and can be left to the submissions stage of the trial.

After a further series of exchanges, the judge said he could allow a bit of latitude, but asked Najib’s lawyers to reduce or sum up their questions by putting their suggestions directly to Ismee for him to agree or disagree, instead of asking him to confirm contents already stated in documents.

The judge also clarified to Najib’s lawyers that they could cross-examine Ismee on his witness statement as they need to dispute it, but said documents already on record and admitted as evidence in 1MDB and which were not disputed can just be part of the defence’s submissions.

Sri Ram also clarified that the prosecution was not objecting to the content of the questions such as Najib’s lawyers’ claims that Shahrol had misled the 1MDB board, but stressed that the objection is on Najib’s lawyers going through documents again which can be part of submissions.

Earlier at the start of today’s court proceedings, Sri Ram had also questioned the relevance of Hariharan’s question, with the judge then also asking Hariharan to phrase his questions by asking whether Ismee agreed or not as it would be “a lot faster than taking him through the history” of events on a 1MDB joint venture.

At another point, the judge too pointed out how Najib’s lawyers could shorten questions such as not asking Ismee to confirm who briefed the 1MDB board on a project when it was already stated in the minutes of the board meeting.

“That can be done by putting it to the witness. You know, I don’t see any end in sight for this witness in the foreseeable future if we carry on like this. I’ve actually allowed quite a lot of latitude but can we just bring matters to a conclusion,” the judge had said.

Najib’s 1MDB trial resumes this afternoon.