KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Najib Razak's defence team said that the former prime minister didn't need to lodge a police report regarding the RM42mil transferred into his personal bank accounts as the relevant agencies had begun investigations on the matter, the High Court heard.
Lawyer Harvinderjit Singh, in his submission, said various investigating agencies had started investigations into the said bank accounts when Sarawak Report did its expose in July 2015.
This was despite the court hearing testimonies earlier that the RM42mil was deposited into Najib's bank accounts in three transactions between December 2014 to February 2015.
"After the report was published, the matter became public. The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the police, Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) and Bank Negara (BNM) began investigating into Najib's accounts on July 6,2015.
"By July, every investigating body were looking at this matter so what was the need for a report," said Harvinderjit here on Wednesday (Oct 23).
On Tuesday (Oct 22), ad hoc prosecutor Datuk V. Sithambaram submitted to the court that Najib should have taken action upon finding out that RM42mil sat in his bank account.
"If the accused was innocent of this sum of RM42mil, he should have sued the bank for unlawful deposit of the said sum which may well amount to his account being used for money laundering.
"The shock that the accused suffered should have translated into a police report being lodged, to show his outrage of unauthorised monies being paid into his account. He should have hounded the police to investigate the case which cost him his reputation," Sithambaram said.
None of these simple steps was taken, said Sithambaram, adding that it only showed the accused's present cry of innocence could not be true.
Najib is facing seven charges, of which three are for criminal breach of trust, one for abuse of power and three for money laundering involving SRC International funds totalling RM42mil.
Justice Mohd Nazlan Mohd Ghazali will deliver his decision on the case on Nov 11.
Did you find this article insightful?