The Malaysian Insight

NAJIB Razak’s lawyers want an Australian handwriting expert to verify the former prime minister’s signature on SRC International Sdn Bhd documents, and the high court to allow the findings to be admitted as evidence.

His team wants Dr Steven J. Strach to examine 35 documents, of which the authenticity of 13 is disputed.

The defence previously argued that some documents, including shareholders’ resolutions and meeting minutes, were forged.

Najib is on trial for charges linked to RM4 billion in loans issued to SRC International in 2011 and 2012, of which he is accused of receiving RM42 million in 2014 and 2015.

“We say that the issue of the authenticity of these documents has yet to be conclusively determined,” said lawyer Harvinderjit Singh during submissions before Kuala Lumpur High Court judge Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali.

“It is a live issue. And, circumstances that revealed themselves in the prosecution’s case, by way of examination of the prosecution’s witnesses, have led to a basis for the accused to say, ‘I doubt the authenticity of these documents, and I would like an expert to look at them’.”

Scanned copies of the disputed documents and sample signatures have been provided to Strach, who has issued a preliminary report, the court heard.

The defence’s forgery argument arose from testimonies by witnesses including former SRC International chairman Ismee Ismail and former director Suboh Md Yassin, who believe it is plausible that the signatures were forged.

On the prosecution’s argument that the defence failed to raise objections at the prosecution stage before Najib was called to the stand on December 3 last year, Harvinderjit said: “He (Najib) was unaware at that stage of the existence of documents where the signatures had been manipulated by ‘cut and paste’.”

The burden is on the prosecution to properly prove that the documents are authentic, he said.

“They are trying to stop an accused person from giving evidence,” said the lawyer, adding that Najib has the right to a fair trial as per Article 5 of the federal constitution.

Despite the trial currently being at the defence stage, said Harvinderjit, the 66-year-old accused is entitled to apply to the court for the issuance of any process for the purposes of adducing evidence, which is provided for under Section 173 of the Penal Code.

“That doesn’t equate to the evidence not being admissible. Even if it is an afterthought defence… you can’t stop the evidence from going in.”

Ad hoc prosecutor V. Sithambaram said: “What is most ridiculous in the defence’s submission is that they are disputing their own exhibits, which they tendered as part of the prosecution’s case. This is the first time that the defence, after tendering documents, is disputing them.”

He argued that the handwriting expert was appointed at the prosecution stage.

“The accused could have served the expert report to the prosecution then.”

Najib also did not make known that his signature was forged when he was questioned by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission in 2018.

“You never complained that it was forged. We are acting on direct evidence of admission from the accused, that those were his signatures on those documents,” said Sithambaram.

He requested that the court strike out the application.

“They are putting us at a procedural disadvantage that we cannot come out from.”

The prosecution’s submission will continue tomorrow, as Harvinderjit is feeling too unwell to conduct his reply today.

Present were Attorney-General Tommy Thomas and Najib’s lead counsel, Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

The trial resumes tomorrow morning. – January 20, 2020.