Actions of then A-G Abdul Gani Patail, cops who conducted the investigation, DPPs who prosecuted and judges who heard the case must be scrutinised.
- Prosecution did not call Najib’s former aide-de-camp to testify although he played a crucial role
- Motive never revealed because the judge reportedly said “motive, although relevant, has never been essential top constitute murder”
- Prosecution did not appeal Razak Baginda’s acquittal
- Immigration department had no record of Altantuya entering Malaysia
Following Azilah’s damning allegations in a statutory declaration (SD) filed together with an affidavit seeking a judicial review of the Federal Court’s decision and a retrial, DAP lawmaker Lim Lip Eng said the authorities must re-examine the whole case from beginning to end.
“Since the onset, the trial was shrouded in controversy,” he was quoted as saying.
Among others, he said, the prosecution did not call Najib’s former aide-de-camp, DSP Musa Safri, to testify during the trial.
“The motive behind her murder was never revealed because the judge was reported to have said that ‘motive, although relevant, has never been essential to constitute murder.’
“The prosecution did not appeal [Abdul] Razak Baginda’s acquittal. The immigration department did not have any record of Altantuya entering Malaysia,” he added.
In his SD, Azilah had detailed Musa’s alleged role in the “covert operation”, which led to Altantuya’s murder.
He also claimed that Razak Baginda, who was a close associate of Najib, had also asked him to kill the woman.
According to Azilah, both Najib and Razak Baginda had allegedly convinced him that Altantuya was a foreign spy who posed a threat to national security.
Razak Baginda was initially charged with abetting the murder but was later discharged.
Demanding a re-investigation into the fresh allegations, Lim, who is also a lawyer, said the authorities must not only focus on whether Najib and Razak Baginda had ordered the killing.
He said the actions of the then attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail, the police officers who conducted the investigation, the DPPs who prosecuted and the judges who heard the case must also be scrutinised.
“This definitely warrants a re-investigation by a new police team or perhaps a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI).
“The ex-AG, prosecutors, judges, lawyers and others involved in the trial should help the new investigation team to see that justice is done,” he added.
Lim said if investigations revealed that there was collusion to protect certain individuals, then those involved must also be brought to justice.
In his affidavit seeking a review, Azilah had claimed there was suppression of evidence and material facts during the proceedings at the High Court and Court of Appeal.