DEBUNKED

Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Fictitious Consultancy Agreement Masked Bribe Payment to Rosmah

December 31, 2020

863

- Advertisement - [resads_adspot id="2"]

Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor had received bribes from Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd’s former managing director Saidi Abang Shamsuddin through a fictitious “consultancy agreement” which was drafted to mask the payment.

In the submissions at the end of its case, the prosecution, led by senior deputy public prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, said the purpose for the “sham agreement” was obvious, which was to find a method to “regularise” the bribe Rosmah wanted to receive.

The prosecution added that the preparation of the agreement was to conceal the true nature of the payment by Saidi, who was the 17th prosecution witness in the corruption trial.

“The euphemism ‘consultancy’ was used to mask the payment of the bribe,” the prosecution said in its written submissions filed on Tuesday.

Deputy public prosecutors Ahmad Akram Gharib, Mohamad Mustafa P Kunyalam, Idham Abdul Ghani and Poh Yin Tinn also prosecuted.

Rosmah, 69, is on trial for soliciting RM187.5 million and two counts of receiving bribes totalling RM6.5 million from Saidi.

The bribes were allegedly received as a reward for helping Jepak Holdings secure a RM1.25 billion solar hybrid project for 369 schools in Sarawak.

In its submissions, the prosecution also said that if the payment in question was truly a genuine political donation to the accused’s (Rosmah) husband former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, then it was unnecessary to mask it under a “consultancy agreement”.

The agreement for the project for the supply and installation of solar hybrid panels to the schools, which has now gone missing, was prepared by 20th prosecution witness, businessman Lawrence Tee Kien Moo, it said.

“The prosecution submits with respect that P20 is a truthful witness, and despite the accusations of unethical conduct hurled at him, his credibility remains unshaken. He is a disinterested witness,” it said.

The prosecution had also in its submissions emphasised that money totalling RM6.5 million was in fact delivered to Rosmah on two occasions at her official and private residences, and this was all in the evidence adduced in court during the trial.

It said that there was also evidence that Rosmah had spoken to two prosecution witnesses, namely then Education Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Madinah Mohamad and her successor Datuk Seri Alias Ahmad, to facilitate or accelerate the award of the contract to Jepak Holdings and later expedite the payment to the company.

The evidence, the prosecution said, had fairly supported the prosecution’s case that Rosmah had solicited a bribe as a reward for assisting Jepak Holdings to obtain the solar hybrid project.

“It is therefore submitted with respect that the prosecution has, upon a maximum evaluation of the evidence, made out a prima facie case against the accused on all three charges,” the prosecution said.

Meanwhile, in a 217-page submission by the defence, Rosmah’s lawyers said she did not personally solicit and accept the bribes from the company, but instead it was Saidi who intended and offered the money to Rosmah as a political donation.

The political donation, the defence said, was meant for Najib as a “gesture of gratitude” for supporting the application by Jepak (to secure the solar hybrid project), and to ensure the victory of Barisan Nasional during the 14th General Election.

It had also in the submissions filed on Monday said the prosecution had failed to demonstrate through its witnesses that Rosmah had personally received the two bags containing the money.

“Moreover, there was not even an iota of evidence from the prosecution to conclude that there was any corrupt money recovered from the accused, nor any bags as described by the witnesses throughout this case to establish the guilt of the charge made against the accused,” the defence said.

On the sham consultancy agreement which was purportedly drafted by Lawrence, the defence said Rosmah had no knowledge about it and that Saidi had testified that the idea to draft the agreement came from Lawrence himself.

They had also in their submissions said there was no credible evidence produced by the prosecution to corroborate the evidence of 21st prosecution witness Datuk Rizal Mansor, who was Rosmah’s former aide, to prove that he was instructed by Rosmah to ask for the gratification.

“The defence most respectfully submits that there is no case to answer and the accused should be acquitted without her defence being called as the prosecution has failed to establish a prima facie case against her,” the defence said.

Lawyers Datuk Jagjit Singh, Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kadir and Azrul Zulkifli Stork represented Rosmah.

High Court judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan, who is presiding over the case, has set Feb 10 for oral submissions by parties before deciding whether Rosmah could be freed from the charges or called to enter her defence.

The prosecution had on Dec 11 wrapped up its case against Rosmah with 23 of its witnesses testifying in the trial.

Rosmah was accused of committing the offences between Jan 2016 and Sept 2017.

She faces a maximum 20 years’ jail and a fine of not less than five times the amount of the gratification, if convicted. – NST

Earlier reports:

Dec 30, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Defence Says No Proof to Show Rosmah Solicited, Received Bribes

Dec 11, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Prosecution Concludes Its Case

Oct 7, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 30

Oct 6, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 29

Oct 5, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 28

Sept 17, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 27

Sept 15, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 26

Sept 14, Rosmah’s Bribe Trial: Day 25