[ad_1]
KUALA LUMPUR (Bernama): The Superior Court judge presiding over Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor’s money laundering and tax evasion case involving RM7,097,750 suggested that the trial be transferred to another judge so that it can be heard earlier.
Judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan made the suggestion after Deputy Prosecutor (DPP) Poh Yih Tinn updated the court on the Rosmah corruption case involving the solar hybrid project for rural schools in Sarawak, which is scheduled for oral presentations on the 10th. February of the next year after the prosecution concluded, he presented his case on December 11.
Judge Zaini, who is presiding over both cases, had initially decided to initiate Rosmah’s money laundering and tax evasion trial after the completion of her corruption trial.
Judge Zaini: Have you not thought about getting another judge to hear this (case) if you are more interested in proceeding sooner?
Poh: I have to consult the higher DPPs.
Judge Zaini: (You should) think about that. Otherwise, it is okay to hold (judgment in) this court. Therefore, we will arrange another case management on February 25 of next year pending your discussion.
Poh: Ok, I’ll discuss it with Datuk Seri (DPP Senior Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram).
Rosmah, 69, who was excused from attending the trial, was represented by her attorney Datuk Geethan Ram Vincent.
On October 4, 2018, the wife of former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of money laundering, involving RM7,097,750, and five counts of not reporting her income to the Inland Revenue Board (LHDN). .
The crimes were allegedly committed at Affin Bank Berhad, Bangunan Getah Asli branch, Jalan Ampang here between December 4, 2013 and June 8, 2017, and at LHDN office at Kompleks Bangunan Kerajaan, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Halim here between May 1, 2014 and May 1, 2018.
The money laundering charges were framed in Section 4 (1) (a) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Financing of Terrorism and Proceeds of Illicit Activities Act of 2001 and are punishable under Section 4 (1) of the same law, which establishes a prison sentence of up to 15 years and a fine of no less than five times the sum or value of the proceeds of the illicit activity or RM5 thousand, whichever is greater, if convicted.
The tax evasion charges made under Section 77 (1) of the Income Tax Act of 1967 required that she submit returns of her income for fiscal year 2013-2017 to the LHDN CEO on April 30, 2014 to 2015 or before that date. , 2017 and 2018 without reasonable excuse contrary to article 112 of the law.- Bernama
[ad_2]
