[ad_1]
KUALA LUMPUR (Bernama): A fictitious agreement was used to cover up the payment of bribes from former Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd Managing Director Saidi Abang Samsudin to Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor (Photo)the prosecution said.
The prosecution, led by Deputy Attorney General Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, said the purpose of the agreement was to “regularize” the bribery Rosmah would receive.
“The object was to prepare an agreement to hide the true nature of the payment of Saidi, who is the 17th prosecution witness, from the accused. The euphemism ‘consulting’ was used to mask the payment of the bribe, ”said the prosecution in its brief filed with the Superior Court here on Tuesday (December 29).
Rosmah, 69, is on trial for requesting RM187.5k and two counts of receiving bribes totaling RM6.5k from Saidi, as a reward for helping Jepak Holdings secure the Integrated Hybrid Photovoltaic Solar System Project, as well as the maintenance and operation of diesel generator sets, for 369 rural schools in Sarawak, worth 1.25 billion ringgit from the Ministry of Education (MOE) through direct negotiation.
The presiding judge, Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, set February 10 for the parties to appear before him for oral clarification, before deciding whether to acquit Rosmah of the corruption charges or request his defense.
The prosecution, which closed its case on December 11, said that if the payment in question was indeed a genuine political donation to Rosmah’s husband, former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, then it was unnecessary to mask it under a “consulting agreement.” .
In the filing at the end of his case, the prosecution said the settlement for the solar hybrid project that has since disappeared was prepared by the 20th prosecution witness, businessman Lawrence Tee Kien Moon.
“Tee is a truthful witness and despite the allegations of unethical conduct that have been leveled at him, his credibility remains unshakeable. He is a disinterested witness and his evidence is purely of corroborative value,” he said.
The prosecution said that based on the evidence, the money was delivered to Rosmah on two occasions, the first payment of RM5 thousand was delivered to her official residence and the second payment of RM1.5 thousand was delivered to her private residence.
He said there was evidence that Rosmah spoke with former Education Minister Datuk Seri Mahdzir Khalid, the then secretary general of the ministry, Tan Sri Madinah Mohamed, and Madinah’s successor, Datuk Seri Alias Ahmad, to facilitate or expedite the award of the contract to Jepak Holdings and subsequently. to expedite payment to the company (Jepak Holdings).
“This evidence fairly supports the prosecution’s case that the defendant requested a bribe as a reward for helping Jepak obtain the solar contract,” the prosecution said.
He said the prosecutor’s decision to prosecute Rosmah and present the legally admissible evidence to prove his guilt is not a selective or discriminatory prosecution.
The prosecution said that the defendant’s argument of selective or discriminatory prosecution, which she denied, was not a defense of the charges against her.
“Based on the foregoing, this Honorable Court moves respectfully to make a determination that the prosecution has established a prima facie case and for an order that the defense of the accused be called on all three charges,” he said.
Meanwhile, the defense, in their briefs filed on Monday (December 28), responded that the prosecution had not established a prima facie case because it was very clear that Saidi was the one who was seeking and offering a political donation to Rosmah.
The defense, led by attorney Datuk Jagjit Singh, said the political donation was intended for Najib, as a “gesture of gratitude” for supporting Jepak Holdings’ application, and to ensure Barisan Nasional’s victory during the 14th general election ( GE14).
On the alleged consulting agreement, the defense said, Rosmah had no knowledge of the document, which was allegedly drafted by Tee, and that Saidi, in his testimonial statement, also testified that the idea of drafting a consulting agreement was the brainchild of Tee.
“There is no independent evidence before the court that the defendant is aware of the alleged consulting agreement or that the defendant has seen it. After the alleged consulting agreement was drafted and finalized, the parties were Jepak and a company called Lucky from Taiwan (the Tee), and the defendant’s name was not mentioned at all.
“Since the defendant had never instructed and her name was not mentioned at all in the alleged consulting agreement, no link could be established with the defendant,” he said.
The defense said that there was also no credible evidence presented by the prosecution to corroborate the evidence of the former Rosmah aide, Datuk Rizal Mansor, to show that the defendant did indeed tell him to ask Saidi for the reward.
Furthermore, he argued that the fact that the gratification was supposedly demanded through Rizal showed that Saidi had no first-hand knowledge to prove that Rosmah was the one who demanded the gratification.
“The prosecution has not shown credible and independent evidence that the defendants requested and received corrupt money. The truth was fully revealed through the evidence of the three main prosecution witnesses, Saidi, Rayyan Radzwill Abdullah (former business partner de Saidi) and Rizal, where their evidence contradicted each other.
“The prosecution’s case does not lead to an irresistible inference that the defendant committed all the crimes charged. Therefore, the defense should not be summoned simply to clear or clarify the case of the prosecution, ”said the defense.-Bernama
[ad_2]
