NAJIB Razak has been granted a stay of execution for his jail sentence and RM210 million fine for the seven graft charges involving RM42 million from SRC International that went to his accounts.

However, Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali, in granting the stay, ordered the bail amount to be increased by an additional RM1 million with two sureties, to be paid by tomorrow.

Nazlan also told Najib to report himself to the nearest police station on the 1st and 15th of each month.

Najib was earlier sentenced to 12 years and the RM210 million fine for the charge of abuse of power, and 10 years for each of the three charges of criminal breach of trust, and for each of the three money-laundering charges.

Najib faces a total of 42 charges spread out over five criminal trials, three of which are ongoing.

The ongoing 1MDB trial involves RM2.28 billion in public funds that Najib is accused of receiving between 2011 and 2014 while at another trial, Najib faces one charge of abuse of power for tampering with the 1MDB audit report.

A fourth trial, also involving SRC International funds, is set to begin on July 5 next year. For that case, Najib denied three money-laundering charges involving RM27 million.

The Malaysian Insight brings you today’s proceedings live:

7.40pm: “This is definitely not the end of the world, because there’s a process of appeal, and we hope that we will be successful there. So the effort will continue, and to my supporters, I hope they will continue to believe in me, believe in our struggle, and continue to be in positive and high spirits,” Najib tells the press outside the court.

“As always, you hope for the best, but you prepare for the worst.

“We are always positive. We believe in our innocence. We believe that we have a strong case. But of course we have to convince the judges, and we will do our best. Shafee will continue to lead the team, and he’s very determined to get the outcome that we believe is only right for us.”

Najib left with supporters repeatedy shouting “Hidup Bossku”.

7.33pm: Nazlan rules the defence has demonstrated exceptional circumstances to qualify for stay of execution for the sentence as well as the fine.

He, however, orders the bail amount to be increased by an additional RM1 million with two sureties, to be paid by tomorrow. 

He also orders Najib to report himself to the nearest police station on the 1st and 15th of each month.

Court adjourns. Najib immediately leaves the court.

He is flanked by some supporters.

7.27pm: Shafee says the full written judgment is only available in three weeks, adds that the defence is expected to file its appeal in three months. 

“My client will be present in court. There is no prejudice in granting the stay, but it is an overwhelming prejudice if Yang Arif does not grant stay – because we are involved in all the cases my client are involved in, such as tomorrow’s case (1MDB audit report tampering hearing).”

Shafee concludes his submission.

7.20pm: Shafee then refers to Article 5 and 8 of the federal constitution, and calls the court to examine all VIP cases cited by Sithambaram.

“Not a single one was given a stay. Anwar Ibrahim finally got a stay at the federal court,” says the lawyer.

“The fact remains he (Najib) has got the right go through two tiers of appeals. Then comes the issue, do we imprison him (during the appeals)? What if at the end of the appeals he wins it? Isn’t it nugatory?”

“It’s like the Malay saying, sia-sia.”

“I implore Yang Arif that not giving a stay will cause him tremendous grievance. Stay can always be given by Yang Arif on condition. It is entirely up to Yang Arif’s discretion, how such conditions are applied.”

7.16pm: Shafee responds by saying that the RM210 million fine amount is unprecedented and warrants to be called “exceptional circumstances.”

“Bear in mind he has other commitments of RM1.69 billion. That is already going to cause him a staggering sort of situation.”

7.08pm: Sithambaram says the defence has not demonstrated exceptional circumstances that qualifies for stay.

6.58pm: Sithambaram responds saying the granting of stay is “the exception to a general rule”.

He says there must be “special circumstances” to a warrant the granting of a stay.

6.35pm: Najib did not visibly react to the passing of the sentence.

Harvinderjit begins the process of applying for a stay of execution pending an appeal at the Court of Appeal.

He cites case judgments to bolster the defence’s argument that additional bail is not required following a conviction.

Najib has already posted RM6 million in total for the five trials he is facing.

Harvinderjit argues that public confidence would be affected if Najib is not granted a stay due to his status as MP adding that Najib’s status in his other trials would also be adversely affected.

6.28pm: Court is in session.

“I have taken into consideration all mitigating factors and into account public interest and the interest of the accused,” says Nazlan. 

The judge says the purpose of laws governing criminal acts is to prevent offenders from repeating the offence. 

Nazlan also noted the accomplishments of the accused during his tenure.

For abuse of power, Nazlan sentences Najib to 12 years and a fine of RM210 million. Nazlan adds five years to the sentence in lieu of failure to pay the fine.

He also sentences the former prime minister to 10 years for each of the CBT and money-laundering charges. All prison sentences are to run concurrently.

There is no fine for the money laundering charges.

5.35pm: “I would like to refer to my tenure as prime minister the country prospered to the extend it experienced robust economic growth,” says Najib.

“Also a period during which we saved the stock market from the longest ever bull run. Ended at almost 1,900 points on the KLSE.

“During this period, I oversaw massive infrastructure development throughout this country, inluding public transport and public housing on a massive scale.

“I also ensured every single community in this country benefited, for example farmers, smallholders, fishermen and government servants. They benefited from programmes that boosted their income. 

Najib says Petronas gave dividends, as did Tabung Haji. Najib said he was for the abolishment for the Internal Security Act, which was something “I was not given much credit for”.

“In this regard, I also put in a proposal to implement a more transparent system of political donation and that proposal required opposition support but the opposition at the time did not agree and so that propsoal did not see the light of day.”

“So Yang Ariff, I would like to say in a nutshell that second, as a Muslim, but let me say this once again, I did not demand the RM42 million, nor was the RM42 million offered to me and there was no evidence to say so. I would like to say I do not have knowledge of the RM42 million.”

Nazlan orders the court to stand down for 15 minutes, after which he will deliver the sentence.

5.30pm: Shafee says Najib wishes to address the court.

“He will be extremely polite and he will say something relevant.”

5.25pm: Sithambaram concludes his submission.

He says the maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a fine of RM210 million, five times the laundered sum of RM42 million, is sought for the conviction for abuse of power.

4.54pm: Sithambaram cites the case of India vs Tamil Nadu chief minister J. Jayalalithaa, who was found guilty of corruption.

4.39pm: Sithambaram refers to the case of former Selangor MB Khir Toyo who was convicted for corruption. He said the 12-month jail sentence handed to Khir in 2011 was described High Court judge Wira Mohtarudin Baki as necessary and a deterrence to ensure other holders of public office do not abuse their positions.

4.30pm: Sithambaram read out a judgment by former Lord President Raja Azlan Shah when convicting former Umno Youth chief Harun Idris in 1977:

“It is painful for me to have to sentence a man I know. I wish it were the duty of some other judge to perform that task. To me this hearing seems to reaffirm the vitality of the rule of law. But to many of us, this hearing also suggests a frightening decay in the integrity of some of our leaders.

“It has given horrible illustrations of Lord Acton’s aphorism ‘power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’, and has focused concern on the need of some avowed limitations upon political authority.

“...the law is no respecter of persons. Nevertheless, it will be impossible to ignore the fact that you are in a different category from any person that I have ever tried. It would be impossible to ignore the fact that, in the eyes of millions of our countrymen and women, you are a patriot and a leader.

“Even those who differ from you in politics look upon you as a man of high ideals. You had every chance to reach the greatest height of human achievement. But half-way along the road, you allowed avarice to corrupt you.

“It is incomprehensible how a man in your position could not, in your own conscience, recognise corruption for what it is. In so doing, you have not only betrayed your party’s cause, for which you have spoken so eloquently, but also the oath of office which you have taken and subscribed before your Sovereign Ruler, and above all, the law of which you are its servant.”

Sithambaram says the same applies to Najib.

4.21pm: “The law is no respecter of persons,” says Sithambaram.

He says the sentence must deter other members of society from repeating Najib’s crime.

4.15pm: Sithambaram says after former attorney-general Apandi Ali cleared Najib of wrongdoing in 2016, the former prime minister took no steps to return the RM42 million.

“This case has tarnished the country’s image, turning it into a kleptocracy.”

Sithambaram says no prime minister cum finance minister has ever been found guilty in Malaysia.

He says previous sentences handed down to public officers are not in the league of Najib, such as police officers and state executive councillors.

4.13pm: “Corruption is widespread in this country, and must not be tolerated for Malaysia to emerge as a first world country. Punishment and deterence should be of paramount (importance),” says Sithambaram. 

“Just as those at high places behave so will those below. Any leniency shown will be misplaced sympathy and a disaster to society.

“The sentence should be for worst case imaginable and this is such a case,” says Sithambaram, adding that was no restitution for the RM42 million.

4.10pm: Court resumes. 

This sentence should serve as a reminder that no one is above the law, says Sithambaram.

The prosecutor says Najib has failed in his obligations to the public and calls for a sentence that will serve as a warning to those holding any similar such office as Najib.

3.39pm: Shafee says 45% of the RM42 million goes to parties to fund welfare, corporate social responsiblity and charity programmes.

He says less than 1% was spent on home renovations and card transactions. Meanwhile, this is the first corruption case in which the convicted person spent so little on himself. 

Shafee maintains that Najib returned US$620 million (RM2.6 billion) of the US$681 million that he received.

“The higher the person, the more serious the fall he would feel. That in itself is punishment,” Shafee says in conclusion.

He informs the court Najib will make a statement to the court after the prosecution makes its submission.

Nazlan grants a request by Sithambaram for a five-minute break.

3.35pm: Shafee says the criminal justice system “would be better respected if any accused person, and not just my client, can walk away feeling justice has been done”.

Shafee says rogue bankers such as former SRC International CEO Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil and former director Suboh Md Yassin “are more guilty”.

“My client feels he’s been singled out, while others who are more guilty have seen no attempt to bring them to justice,” adding that Najib feels he is a victim of “political circumstances”.  

Shafee said the investigation may have fallen short in that regard.

“I would also like to highlight that my client has undergone severe punishment, that he has been charged in at least four other courts. He has also been hounded by the tax department and the most ridiculous sum of money is now placed on him as taxable income of RM1.69 billion. A staggering amount on an individual. Which means the tax department is saying his income is times five that, which is preposterous and unbelievable. It as unbeliaviable… as to claim a cow can jump over the moon.”

Shafee says Najib is a victim of overt “oppression”.

“He therefore suffers as a consequence of that.”

3.25pm: SRC was set up on EPU’s recommendation despite the fact it was mooted by 1MDB, says Shafee.

“The idea of setting up SRC was a noble one, because like Petronas it was for the continued supply of electricity, relying on other than gas and oil.

“My client informs me that he was in fact very supportive of idea of the setting up of SRC in view of the policy and the motivation of SRC’s establishment. And it is only for that sole reason that he may have been seen to be eager and in fact acted swiftly on certain decisions. He says that must not be mistaken with the idea that he is swift to make some decisions because he has got some bad motives.”

“Yang Ariff, my client has never been a person who is involved in corporate matters. He has never been a board member or been in a position to advise a board.

“As Yang Ariff has experience with the Securities Commission… my client is not a professional corporate person. His genuine belief that the board members would have done their own due compliances and due diligence, he holds that until today.

“He believes that was what they were supposed to do. He never micro managed any of these decisions and he says, and I want to stress this, if he was at fault, he was only at fault for trusting people that ought the run the company, both 1MDB as well as SRC.

“In certain instances, he overtrusted them. For that he is willing to take the blame, but he is not the first prime minister to overtrust people.”

Shafee says all prime ministers, particularly Dr Mahathir Mohamad, had the misfortune to need to overly trust people and to rely on them.

3.18pm: Najib provided three statements to the MACC between 2015 and 2018, and other statements to the police, Shafee says.

3.10pm: Shafee responds by saying he is “crippled” because he is not able to take instructions on mitigation, adding that he is “completely hampered’ and would not be able to make mitigation a “very smooth” process.

“Mitigation ought not to be taken ritualistic and ought to be taken seriously,” says Shafee referring to a prior judgment.

However, he begins the mitigation process, saying Najib was born in Kuala Nipis, Pahang, on July 23, 1953, and has a degree from the University of Nottingham.

Shafee says Najib received his primary and secondary education at St John’s Institution in Kuala Lumpur.

The lawyer proceeds to list Najib’s political activities beginning with Pekan Umno.

Shafee says throughout Najib’s nine years as prime mnister, between 2009 to 2018, he had to oversee 70 companies at Khazanah and Petronas. Meanwhile, he is Pekan Umno chief and adviser to the Barisan Nasional coalition.

“I was informed my client did not have so much as a traffic summons or any other offence, small or big in nature.

“Second, it is a given fact he co-operated with the police and the MACC. In 2015 itself – during his tenure as prime minister and minister of finance – during which this matter was being investigated, he initiated in cabinet the Public Accounts Committee, which oversaw SRC issues.

“With all these inviestigations, there has never been any allegations of witness tampering.”

3.05pm: “Althoguh there are situations where sentencing can be postponed, the accused needs a good excuse for sentencing to be postponed,” says Nazlan.

He dismisses the adjournment for sentencing and orders that mitigation proceed. However, he notes that Najib can still apply for a stay of execution, but only after sentencing.

2.57pm: Shafee responds saying in most guilty plea cases, adjournments for sentencing are to allow the accused to change their minds before sentencing. Referring to the US jury trial system, Shafee says sentencing is the preropgative of the judge, not the jury.

“This is after a harrowing trial, the judge has to postpone sentencing, especially after hearing the mitigating circumstances.”

“The law says if the accused is convicted, the court shall then pass sentence according to law. But only if it is said, when the accused is convicted, then my learned friend (Sithambaram) may have a point.”

Nazlan takes a moment to decide.

2.50pm: Sithambaram addresses the court, saying all except one case mentioned by Shafee involved accused who had already pleaded guilty.

“The only case that comes closest to today’s hearing is the Brunei case of Murni.

“That is the only case where Chief Justice Roberts, in a full trial case, the sentencing indeed was adjourned. But the passage that I would like your Lordship to read…”

Sithambaram reads out the judgment by the Chief Justice of Brunei, saying that courts should only grant postponement under exceptional circumstances.

“The defence is not satisfied that the request for a written judgment is not avaialble. We say that your Lordship has delivered the judgment. That should be sufficient.”

Sithambaram refers to the US legal system allowing for postponement of sentencing, as cited by the defence.

However, the prosecutor says the US legal system requires a jury, whereas in the SRC International trial, the hearing is before the judge.

Sithambaram wishes the court to record the prosecution’s objection to the application by the defence to postpone the sentencing.

“The court is duty bound to pass the sentence. Finally, the status of the accused being on bail pre-conviction and post-conviction is very is different.”

Sithambaram says if an adjournment is granted, Najib must be required to pay additional bail.

2.45pm: Nazlan asks whether Najib’s status has changed since conviction and whether additional bail is needed.

Shafee says not, citing another case where the accused was sentence for two years.

“The accused had RM500,000 bail and it was not increased,” says Shafee, adding that the role of bail is not to punish but to ensure the accused appears in court.

Shafee says his client has been compliant.

“And now with the MCO, we are all equally punished. So where is the risk?”

Shafee also tells the court that Najib’s daughter has flown in from Singapore to be with him, while pointing out that Najib is also constantly escorted by the police.

“They work 24 hours a day,” Shafee says of the police, adding that the officers guarding the former PM answer to the Inspector-General of Police, then the defence lawyer takes his seat.

2.40pm: Nazlan asks whether the accused was already in custody in most of the cases Shafee mentions.

“Not all,” says Shafee.

Shafee maintains that sentencing and mitigation can be separated from the day verdict is delivered.

He says he was informed by former solicitor-general Yusof Zainal Abiden that such arrangements are routine.

2.25pm: Shafee refers to a case he handled, whereby a judge convicted a client but did not pass sentence because the accused asked for a postponement of sentencing.

He refers to another case where the accused received postponement of sentencing for three days after the verdict was delivered.

Shafee refers to a third case where a high court judge adjourned the court after delivering the verdict. The judge later sentenced the accused to death by hanging.

“It is a common theme, Yang Ariff,” says Shafee.

He refers to another Court of Appeal case in 2017 where a man accused of murdering his wife later attempted to commit suicide.

The respondant pleaded guilty to the second charge and the judge postponed the sentencing of the second charge until conviction of the first charge, says Shafee.

Najib’s lawyer refers to other cases whereby the passing of the sentence was postponed after the verdicts were delivered, including one case where it was postponed for a month.

Shafee refers to Dickinson vs Public Prosecutor in 1955, where the drunk driver was convicted and his sentencing postponed due to enable proper mitigation to be conducted.

2.20pm: Najib re-enters the court from the witness room.

Lawyers have taken their positions and are preparing their submissions.

Court is in session.

12.51pm: Nazlan adjourns the court until 2pm. He says if he is not convinced by defence’s argument, then mitigation will be held this afternoon.

Najib gets up and is greeted by supporters. He leaves the court.

12.47pm: Shafee says Najib is bound by the terms of the bail until the conviction process is over, arguing to stay the sentencing until Monday.

“Yang Ariff can be assured, we will all be here on Monday morning.”

Nazlan asks the defence what would happen to a convicted person in between.

“I do not want to create a precedent or rewrite law.”

Nazlan asks after the RM3.5 million bail posted by Najib and the defence argues the bail applies until sentencing.

“It is not something unusual. I have personally undertaken ten or more cases,” says Shafee.

“Has the prosecution anything to say about this? I am not convinced,” says Nazlan.

Shafee asks for the court to adjourn and for the defence to return to court at 2:30pm.

“I could ask somebody in mind, a former DPP and solicitor-general on this matter,” says Shafee.

12.41pm: Sithambaram then says: “I wish to put on record that we are ready for sentencing. If the accused is convicted the court shall pass sentence according to law. It appears that after a conviction a sentence shall be passed. The question of staying this sentence does not arise.”

Sithambaram reads out Section 57 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964, which says no appeal shall operate as a stay of execution, but the High Court may stay execution on any judgment, order, conviction or sentence pending appeal on such terms as security for the payment of any money, or the performance or non-performance of any act, or the suffering of any punishment ordered by or in the judgment, order, conviction or sentence as the Court may deem reasonable.

12.35pm: Shafee expressed thanks, saying Sithambaram has taken a “kind approach” and “for not taking a strong position”.

He adds the judge may grant a stay of execution. The lawyer says there is no enforcement of the sentencing until it is announced.

Shafee refers to Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which says the court may stay execution on any judgement, order or sentence.

“So stay may be undertaken by Yang Ariff in the interim pending the sentencing. We will also also ask for stay, pending the Court of Appeal.

“This jurisprudence is very well developed in the US legal system where counsel can be sued by client for not taking instructions by him regarding mitigation. There are many things we need to further take are minute findings (from the judgment).

“I’ve said it in the 1MDB case, and the SRC case, it is not an understatement that this together with 1MDB, is probably without exaggerating the biggest case in the world. Without batting an eyelid, i can say that.

“So we need an amount of time to put together the evidence from the prosecution and we from the defence for mitigation.”

Shafee refers to evidence submitted by former attorney-general Apandi Ali and former MACC chief Dzulkifli Ahmad that may be used for mitigation.

“I’ve never done any mitigation in less than two hours. I take it seriously.”

12.28pm: Harvinderjit addresses the court on the matter of possible appeal. He says he intends to file a formal application as soon as the mitigation process is over.

Najib appears slumped in the dock, leaning back against the rails. The mood among defence lawyers appears sombre.

Sithambaram addresses the court. He says mitigation may be proceed with just the oral judgment, adding the defence need not wait for the full judgment in three weeks.

“Your Lordship has found the accused guilty and yet there is not a stay of any sort. And yet there is mitigation.”

He says the prosecution would be prejudiced if a stay of execution is not granted.

12.17pm: I, therefore, find the accused guilty and convict the accused (of) all seven charges.

Najib who is seated, appears calm when the verdict is delivered.

Shafee addresses the court, saying plea for mitigation should not be treated as a ritualistic step by the accused only to be dismissed by the court.

He suggests a mitigation hearing could be held on Monday.

He says he believes there would be no prejudice on the part of the prosecution and that Najib would not be going anywhere as the “country is under lockdown” from the Covid-19 pandemic.

12.14pm: On Najib’s three money-laundering charges, Nazlan says the accused exhibited “wilful blindness” from his testimony, regarding the remittance of the RM42 million into his bank accounts.

The facts and circumstances established by the evidence showed Najib could not claim to having no knowledge regarding his bank accounts.

The defence failed to cast reasonable doubt for Najib’s three counts of money-laundering (Section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act).

12.12pm: The defence has failed to raise reasonable doubt for the three counts of criminal breach of trust under Section 409 of the Penal Code, regarding the RM42 million, says Nazlan.

12.09pm: “In my judgment, the accused could not have believed the money was from Arab donation,” says Nazlan.

“This defence is unsustainable because it is fully contrived. It is difficult not to the characterise the defence of the Arab donation to be self-serving.”

The judge says it does not pass the threshold of “logic and common sense”.

12.03pm: The purported Arab donation, in the billions, was purportedly to defend moderate Islam and promote peace.

Nazlan says, however, the money was used for activities that could only be interpreted as political activities on behalf of the Barisan Nasional coalition.

Najib also used alleged donation for “blatantly personal expenses”, such as trips to Italy and Hawaii.

The judge concludes that the claims of Arab donation remain unproven and that the letters from Prince Saud were never tendered as evidence.

11.56am: Nazlan refers to three letters by a Prince Saud purportedly declaring billions in donations from Saudi Arabia, which Najib did not declare to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission as gifts.

Najib also didn’t thank the Saudi government in writing for the donation. In addition, Najib testified that he does not know who Prince Saud was.

11.48am: King Abdullah had never in a formal meeting told Najib that he intends to support the latter.

The judge also notes a claim by former minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Islamic Affairs) Jamil Khir Baharom that the king wanted to transfer the money via a company account to Najib’s accounts to avoid public scrutiny.

“This is astounding.”

11.43am: There has been a total absence of government confirmation that could have been produced in court that the prime minister received a donation from King Abdullah, says Nazlan.

11.42am: There was no official proclamation that the donation from one nation to another.

“The accused could have picked up his phone to verify the donation,” says Nazlan, adding that Najib did not communicate with either foreign ministry officials or the Saudi government.

“I find that the failure of the accused to ensure official confirmation that the donation was officially from King Abdullah to be improbable.”

11.39am: The defence’s argument that Najib received money from the late Abdullah bin Abdulaziz Al Saud cannot be sustained because there is no evidence that Najib attempted to verify the donation or the purpose of it with the king or Riyadh.

“The accused merely took the word of Jho Low.”

Najib merely relied on Low’s claims based on the latter’s purported close relationship with the Arab royals. Nazlan is referring to a meeting in Riyadh in January 2010.

11.35am: Low would not engage in deceitful activities harmful to the accused.

“I don’t not think Jho Low would risk to do what he needed to do ensure funds are sufficient to risk his relationship with Najib.”

The judge says it’s “too far-fetched” to imagine Najib being a victim of a scam by a subordinate, adding that the defence’s argument is “self-serving”.

“All roads lead to Rome, or in this case Riyadh, or so it seems,” says Nazlan, referring to the defence argument that the RM42 million originated from Arab donations.

11.27am: Nazlan has now spent more than an hour reading the judgment.

11.26am: Najib did not “take the logical step to return the RM42 million” when informed that the money originated from SRC International.

The judge said as shareholder of Minister of Finance Inc, which controlled SRC International, Najib had the duty to ensure the return of the funds.

11.17am: Najib, in his testimony, admitted knowledge that 1MDB intermediary figure Low Taek Jho was in communication with the former prime minister’s late private secretary Azlin Alias on the status of the bank accounts.

Despite Najib’s denial of knowledge of his account between 2011 and 2015, the Pekan MP was known to have issued cheques when money was transferred into them.

The amount transacted reached RM1 billion at one point, says Nazlan, adding that Najib was being deceptive regarding his actual knowledge of the accounts, including the remittance of the RM42 million from SRC International.

11.11am: Nazlan refers to claims of forgery by the defence relating to banking documents. Former SRC International director Suboh Md Yassin claimed that it was possible his signature was forged.

The witness was oblivious to what he had signed, regardless of the forgery.

“He has does not remember what he has signed.”

In addition to five years that have passed since he signed the documents, Nazlan says the witnesss suffered a stroke.

It was not out of the ordinary for companies to use documents that bear photocopied signatures of the signatories.

11.03am: The second loan of RM2 billion from KWAP to SRC International was approved despite Najib not knowing exactly what had happened to the first loan of RM2 billion.

The judge says Najib’s defence had been that the matter was the prerogative of the SRC International board.

“I find it hard to fathom when the sum involved is extremely large by any measure,” Nazlan says.

The defence has failed to refute beyond reasonable doubt Najib’s abuse of power charge under (Section 23(1) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009.

10.55am: On the defence’s argument that the prosecution could not establish a link between the RM42 million in Najib’s account and the RM4 billion in KWAP loans to SRC International, Nazlan says it is not required of the prosecution to do so in the case to prove Najib’s guilt.

10.54am: Nazlan says the defence has failed to disprove prosecution’s case that Najib’s actions were not for the advancement for national interests.

10.45am: Former second finance minister Ahmad Husni wanted to travel to Switzerland in 2015 to investigate billions in SRC International funds frozen by the authorities there.

Nazlan says Najib had not only stopped Husni but denied in his testimony that a full government delegation would have done a better job in probing into the frozen funds.

Najib instead left the matter to the SRC International board to resolve.

10.43am: Najib agreed during cross-examination that the government guarantees for the KWAP loans were necessary as SRC International could not operate because it had no track record.

Nazlan says such was the national agenda argument offered by the accused.

“This narrative does not appear to be entirely true when the testimony of former Treasury secretary-general Mohd Irwan Serigar Abdullah is considered.”

Irwan’s evidence was based on his long service, who maintained that a company such as SRC International must be able to establish its ability to repay the loan.

10.32am: Nazlan says the KWAP process was rushed. Former Treasury secretary-general Wan Abdul Aziz Wan Abdullah, who was appointed as KWAP chairman, was made to expedite RM4 billion in loans to SRC International.

10.26am: The Economic Planning Unit did not recommend Retirement Fund Inc (KWAP) loans to SRC International, instead proposing conventional loans to the government-linked entity.

10.24am: Nazlan says Najib played a pivotal role in the establishment of SRC International.

“Despite the matter being in the 10th Malaysia Plan, the impetus came from someone associated with 1MDB and not originated from some government agency.”

10.19am: Nazlan begins reading the judgment by noting that prima facie was established at the end of the prosecution stage, in November.

The prosecution must prove their case beyond reasonable doubt.

10.18am: Nazlan thanks lawyers from both sides for their professionalism and decorum during the trial.

He says he will read out his key findings and the full written judgment will be available in three weeks for parties who wish to appeal.

10.17am: Najib’s lead counsel, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, enters the court. Court is in session.

10.14am: Najib’s daughter, Nooryana Najwa, in cream baju kurung, is seated at the back with Riza.

10.12am: Defence counsel Harvindejit Singh enters the courtroom and banters with Sithambaram. The public gallery is filled with members of the media and Umno members.

10.03am: Rosli Abu Bakar, 51, an Umno member from Baling says he all the way “to show support for Bossku”.

10.01am: Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi is seated beside Najib. Also present in the public gallery is Najib’s stepson, Riza Aziz.

Also in the public gallery are Mohamad as well as former Pahang Menteri besar Adnan Yaakob.

10am: Megat Ikhsan Zulkarnain, 49, from Kajang says he’s here to show support.

“I believe he is innocent. He has done a lot to help the people when he was the PM. This is a set up to put him in jail. I have a feeling he will be jailed.”

9.58am: Najib, flanked by some supporters, is now seated at the public gallery. He engages in small talk and checks his phone.

9.57am: V. Sithambaram has entered the court, along with other prosecutors, who are wearing masks.

9.52am: Lawyers start to fill the courtroom. Najib has yet to enter the room.

None of his family members is spotted at the court complex.

9.36am: Mat Hasan accompanies Najib to the 5th floor courtroom.

9.27am: Najib in a light brown suit arrives with about 100 supporters.

9.20am: Umno deputy president Mohamad Hasan arrives with a group of supporters in blue T-shirts.

8.50am: Members of the media are being allowed through the gate. The courthouse is watched over by dozens of armed police officers.

8.32am: Lawyers with court appointments allowed in by officers.

8.20am: At least 100 Najib supporters outside the Kuala Lumpur court complex. Members of the media along with lawyers and others with court appearances waiting for security clearance.

More supporters waiting at Masjid Wilayah.

8.15am: Several supporters, dressed in red attire, shout “Hidup Bossku” outside the main gate. – July 28, 2020.