Key witness: Statements inconsistent due to info by MACC officer
KUALA LUMPUR: A “special investigation” is why the statements of a key prosecution witness in the ongoing corruption trial of Lim Guan Eng have been inconsistent.
Consortium Zenith Construction Sdn Bhd (CZCSB) executive director Datuk Zarul Ahmad Mohd Zulkifli said he did not mention Lim’s name in his statement given during the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) probe into businessman G. Gnanaraja because an MACC officer told him there was a “special investigation” into the former Penang chief minister.
Lim’s lead counsel Haijan Omar: So your explanation of why you didn’t mention the role of Gnanaraja with Lim Guan Eng in your statement here was because the MACC investigation officer didn’t allow you to?
Zarul Ahmad: It’s not that he didn’t allow it. He told me there was another special investigation involved.
Haijan: You have been given a clear warning in court to tell the truth. You should state all you know.
Zarul Ahmad: I already did, but there was a special investigation. And the officer told me to focus on this (Gnanaraja’s) case.
When Haijan asked whether RM15mil was deposited into the account of Bumi Muhibah Capital Holding Sdn Bhd for Gnanaraja to settle his case with then prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Zarul Ahmad answered in the affirmative.
Haijan: In July 2017, when the payment was made to Bumi Muhibah, you said no payment was made to Gnanaraja meant for Lim Guan Eng.
Zarul Ahmad: Yes.
Haijan: So Bumi Muhibah was not used as a special purpose vehicle (SPV) to pay a bribe to Lim Guan Eng.
Zarul Ahmad: Agree.
Haijan: The money was meant for the PM.
Zarul Ahmad: Yes.
Haijan: That’s why the SPV was never used to pay anything to Lim Guan Eng.
Zarul Ahmad: I disagree.
Despite Gnanaraja’s “middleman” role between him and Najib, Zarul Ahmad acknowledged that such a role between him and Lim was not stated in his statement with the MACC for the ongoing case. He said payment to Lim was made only in cash and not through any special-purpose vehicle.Zarul Ahmad said he only realised he was cheated after the MACC began investigating Gnanaraja, adding that he found out the money deposited into Bumi Muhibah was not used to pay Najib but for Gnanaraja’s own business.
Zarul Ahmad was being questioned during an impeachment proceeding into his conflicting statements with the MACC in the Sessions Court and in a previous Shah Alam case.
In the 2019 Shah Alam case, Zarul Ahmad sued Gnanaraja for cheating him of RM19mil as an inducement to help drop money laundering charges against him.
However, Gnanaraja pleaded guilty to an alternative charge under the Companies Act and was fined RM230,000, while the cheating case has since been classified as “no further action”.
When questioned by Lim’s counsel, RSN Rayer, Zarul Ahmad agreed that he mentioned to the MACC in 2018 that the RM2mil he gave to Gnanaraja was to “keep it warm” for Najib as the general election was coming up and it was also to get future projects too.
He also agreed with Haijan that he did not tell the MACC that another RM2mil was handed to Gnanaraja on Aug 18, 2017, and that he gave a total of RM4mil to the businessman.
However, he disagreed that Lim’s involvement was an “afterthought” as his name was never mentioned in statements recorded during the investigation into Gnanaraja.
