Peguam utama bekas Perdana Menteri, Tan Sri Shafee kunci mulut dan enggan mengulas lanjut mengenai perbicaraan kes 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
Shafee menegaskan, beliau bimbang jika kenyataannya dimanipulasi petugas media memandangkan perbicaraan 1MDB kali ini berjalan selepas Datuk Seri Najib Razak menjalani hukuman penjara dalam kes penyelewengan dana SRC International Sdn Bhd berjumlah RM42 juta.
“Kamu memanipulasi dan mengubah kenyataan kami, walaupun dalam mahkamah (tinggi),” katanya kepada pemberita di lobi Kompleks Mahkamah Kuala Lumpur, semalam.
Ketika ditanya pemberita mengenai keadaan bekas Perdana Menteri keenam itu, Shafee bagaimanapun meminta petugas media mencari jawapan sendiri.
“Pergi dan cari sendiri (jawapan),” katanya lagi.
Terdahulu, Ahli Parlimen Pekan itu hadir ke Mahkamah Tinggi di sini kira-kira jam 8.27 pagi tadi bagi menghadiri perbicaraan kes 1MDB.
Mahkamah sebelum ini telah mengeluarkan perintah kepada pihak penjara supaya bekas Perdana Menteri berusia 69 tahun itu menghadiri prosiding hari ini di hadapan Hakim Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
Najib menghadapi empat pertuduhan menggunakan kedudukannya untuk memperoleh suapan berjumlah RM2.3 bilion daripada dana 1MDB dan 21 pertuduhan pengubahan wang haram melibatkan jumlah sama.
Selasa lalu, Najib dimasukkan ke Penjara Kajang untuk menjalani hukuman penjara selepas Mahkamah Persekutuan mengekalkan sabitan dan hukuman penjara 12 tahun serta denda RM210 juta ke atas Najib kerana menyeleweng dana SRC International Sdn Bhd berjumlah RM42 juta.
Panel lima hakim dipengerusikan Ketua Hakim Negara Tun Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat menolak rayuan Najib untuk mengetepikan sabitan dan hukuman yang diputuskan Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur pada 28 Julai 2020.
Habis tu yg perangai kotor dorg yg saja2 main kejap dilucutkan jd lawyer kejap lantik balik semata2 nak tangguhkan trial lagi tak jahat ke, lps tu acah2 victim ke hulu kenhilirrr
Post time 26-8-2022 03:25 PMFrom the mobile phone|Show all posts
Biasanya loyer akn mintak client declare awal2 ada buat @ x buar kesalahan, sbb dia nk cari loophole mcm mna nk belit dlm court samada technical error or bukti x kuat, so diorg blh propose buang kes. Tp bila ada prima facie, loyer akn guna taktik delay, mc, operate, slipped disc, statute barred etc2
Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Adel Al-Jubeir today admitted that the donation to Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak indeed came from Saudi Arabia.
"We are aware of the donation and it is a genuine donation with nothing expected in return. We are also fully aware that the attorney-general of Malaysia has thoroughly investigated the matter and found no wrongdoing.
"So, as far as we are concerned, the matter is closed," Al-Jubeir told Malaysian reporters in Istanbul yesterday.
Earlier, Al-Jubeir held a bilateral meeting with Najib on the sidelines of the 13th Summit of the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.
Attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali had, on Jan 26, cleared Najib of any wrongdoing in relation to investigations into the SRC International Sdn Bhd and the RM2.6 billion alleged to have been deposited into the prime minister's personal bank accounts.
Apandi said the investigations revealed that the amount deposited was RM2.08 billion, and it was a personal donation from the Saudi royal family in 2013, of which RM2.03 billion was returned to the contributor the same year. https://www.malaysiakini.com/news/337914
2. ‘Fantastical’ multi-billion ringgit ‘donation’ by still-unnamed Saudi royalty
For Lim to prove his defence of justification, he has to show that his comments on Apandi are either true or substantially true.
The High Court listed four areas of evidence that Apandi had provided in court, including his “perplexingly ‘magnanimous’ decision to exonerate Najib Razak and his bewildering acceptance of the existence of the fantastical ‘donation’ by the unnamed Saudi Royalty even at the face of the fact that RM42 million was already known to have been transferred from SRC’s account (and not any Saudi Royalty account) to Najib Razak’s personal account”.
Najib previously maintained that money that came into his bank accounts were a donation from Saudi royalty, but was charged in 2018 and convicted in 2020 over the misappropriation of RM42 million of SRC funds that made its way to his accounts, and is currently appealing to the Federal Court against his conviction.
The High Court judge said Apandi’s decision to clear Najib of wrongdoing and to instead choose the “fantastical narrative of an unproven decision” was the most telling evidence that purportedly showed Apandi’s alleged disinterest and indifference to the rule of law and even common sense.
The High Court expressed its disdain for what it described as Apandi’s own contradictions in his testimony in court as his own witness during the hearing of the defamation lawsuit, his “evasiveness and outright untruth”.
The judge noted that then-AG Apandi had in a January 26, 2016 press conference claimed that the RM2.6 billion paid into Najib’s personal account was a donation from the Saudi royal family, and that Apandi had also claimed the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) had met and recorded statements from the donor who confirmed the monies were donated to Najib privately.
In the same 2016 press conference, Apandi had also said there was no need for Malaysia to seek for mutual legal assistance to complete investigations as there is no criminal wrong, and that there is no criminal wrong in SRC’s RM42 million transfer to Najib’s personal account.
The High Court said Apandi’s 2016 assertion that his delegation had flown to Riyadh, Saudi Arabia and personally met with the alleged donor and recorded his personal confirmation of the donation was actually “untruthful”, noting that Apandi had during the defamation lawsuit not only contradicted himself but admitted that the delegation did not even meet nor speak to the alleged donor.
The judge quoted excerpts of the cross-examination of Apandi during the defamation lawsuit where Lim’s lawyer had asked if the delegation could not confirm having actually met with the Prince Saudi, while Apandi answered “I was made to understand that Saudi prince refused to meet anybody.”
The judge said Apandi’s testimony in the court was a “total contradiction”, and that it was indeed suspicious and reasonable to ponder the need to be deceptive about the critical proof of the alleged donation by the Saudi royal family.
“Why would the attorney general bend the truth about meeting and recording a statement by the alleged donor? Why would the attorney general declare to the world that his delegation has met the donor (and obtained confirmation from the donor) while it was well within his knowledge that his delegation did not even speak or meet with the ‘fabled’ donor?” the judge asked.
On this point alone, the judge said it was glaringly obvious that Lim’s remark on Apandi is justified.
“Just for the plaintiff’s untruth about actually meeting the donor, it poses critical questions and grounds for the plaintiff to explain himself under an investigation,” the judge said, referring to Apandi as the plaintiff.
Post time 26-8-2022 11:37 AM
变色卡
![[KUIZ PERUBATAN MINGGUAN VOL. 7]: Mudah aje, ilmu harian! VOL.7](https://uf.cari.com.my/forumx/mforum/block/ca/cafa22106bf87ee6a0ff6b0584fea8d8.jpg)