It’s a ‘myth’ that Najib wanted to be 1MDB advisory board’s chairman, ex-CEO offered it to him, says his lawyer

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 22 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak was offered the role of becoming the chairman of 1Malaysia Development Berhad’s (1MDB) board of advisers, his lawyer claimed today.

In the 1MDB trial, Najib is accused of having misused his three positions — including as 1MDB board of advisers’ chairman and as finance minister — to get RM2.27 billion of 1MDB-linked funds in gratification for himself.

Najib’s lawyer Wan Azwan Aiman Wan Fakhruddin instead claimed that 1MDB’s and 1MDB’s predecessor TIA’s former CEO Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi’s July 19, 2009 letter shows that it was not Najib who had wanted that advisory position.

“This letter single-handedly debunks the myth that Datuk Seri Najib wanted to be the permanent chairman of 1MDB’s board of advisers. Rather it was offered to him, it was Shahrol’s proposal,” Wan Azwan Aiman told the High Court today in the 1MDB trial.

Shahrol’s July 2009 letter had proposed to Najib that the prime minister be made the permanent chairman of 1MDB’s board of advisers, and had also proposed that all of 1MDB’s board of advisers and board of directors are to be appointed under the sole prerogative of the board of advisers’ chairman.

In one of the four power of abuse charges in the 1MDB trial, Najib is accused of misusing his position to get RM60 million for himself, by taking actions such on July 29, 2009 approving the federal government’s takeover of the Terengganu state’s Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA) and changing its name into 1MDB.

To prove its case, Najib’s lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said the prosecution would have to show that Najib had purposefully engineered the takeover of 1MDB “so that TIA/ 1MDB becomes a vehicle for the fraud”. He said the prosecution would have to prove an act is corrupt by showing it is in order to get gratification.

Shafee asks: Was it Najib’s greed or was he adopting a baby?

Wan Azwan Aiman described TIA as having been the “baby” of the Terengganu Sultan who was also the Yang di-Pertuan Agong then, while Shafee had asked the High Court to consider if Najib had merely adopted this baby through the federalisation or federal government’s takeover and renaming of TIA.

Shafee went through a list of events after the Cabinet had approved a federal government guarantee of TIA’s RM5 billion borrowing through Islamic bonds.

“These events in their chronology are important to show to Yang Arif what is actually the reason for the federalisation. Was it Datuk Seri Najib’s greed or was he given a baby that is already born and for him to adopt at the federal level?” Shafee said.

Among other things, Shafee argued that Najib did not have a personal interest in the TIA takeover, but said he had instead acted officially in the interest of the government.

Shafee argued that Najib “was not overly eager to get the federal government to take over TIA”. Instead, Najib’s lawyers alleged that it was Shahrol who was very “eager” for the federalisation of the TIA.

Shafee argued that the federal government had no choice but to take over TIA, for reasons such as safeguarding the federal government’s interest since it had guaranteed TIA’s RM5 billion debt.

Shafee claimed the federal government’s decision to takeover TIA was never Najib’s “machination” or “continuing ploy” to get gratification, but argued that the federal government had to intervene to prevent a default on the RM5 billion bonds.

The trial before judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah resumes this afternoon.