An MACC officer testifying for Najib Abdul Razak’s defence has denied that his promotion was expedited due to the former prime minister.
Defence witness Fikri Ab Rahim told the Putrajaya High Court that his 2017 promotion to Jusa-C was based on the MACC’s assessment of his performance.
During re-examination by defence counsel Shafee Abdullah, Fikri—who joined the MACC in 2004—dismissed the prosecution’s suggestion that his career progression was linked to his involvement in a 2015 trip to Saudi Arabia. The trip, which included officers from the MACC and the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC), aimed to verify four purported Arab donation letters supporting Najib’s claim that Middle Eastern royalty had promised him funds.
Shafee: The prosecutors raised claims about your promotion.
Fikri: I disagree, as my promotion was determined by the MACC and (then chief commissioner) Abu Kassim (Mohamed).
Fikri explained that during the 2015 1MDB investigation, he held Grade 54, having advanced rapidly from Grade 41. However, he clarified that his promotion to Jusa-C only occurred in 2017, not immediately. He maintained that Najib played no role in his promotion, attributing it solely to the MACC and Abu Kassim.
In the civil service, promotion from Grade 41 to 54 involves skipping four levels, and advancement to Jusa-C is typically granted for exceptional performance.
Fikri also served as a witness in Najib’s separate RM42 million SRC corruption trial. Najib was prime minister from 2009 to 2018, while Abu Kassim’s tenure ended in August 2016.
Earlier, the court heard that the MACC’s 2015 trip to Saudi Arabia was not intended to collect pre-prepared statements from an alleged Saudi prince and Low Taek Jho’s associate, Eric Tan, regarding the RM2.6 billion deposited into Najib’s personal accounts.
Deputy public prosecutor Ahmad Akram Gharib suggested that Fikri knew in advance that the MACC was merely collecting completed statements from Prince Saud and Tan. Fikri disagreed.
Akram noted that MACC officers recorded the Saudi prince’s statement via his lawyer, Mohamad Abdullah Al-Koman, in just 20 minutes, while Tan’s statement took only 25 minutes. However, Fikri defended MACC officer Datuk Mohd Hafaz Nazar, stating he was “capable” of handling the process efficiently.
When pressed by Akram on whether MACC had merely reformatted pre-prepared statements into its official format before bringing them back to Malaysia, Fikri again disagreed.
Akram: Why I said you did that is because the investigation involved a sitting PM. That’s why everything was pre-planned—you just went there, took the statements, and returned.
Fikri: Disagree.
Akram: And because of your contribution, you were promoted quickly.
Fikri: Disagree.