Was money in accounts ‘gift’, ‘political donation’ or ‘financial support’ from Saudi? Najib says it’s all the same

PUTRAJAYA, Jan 22 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak today appeared to downplay the four different ways he had described the alleged Saudi royal promise which purportedly led to more than RM2 billion being sent to his personal bank accounts, saying that it all pointed to a “present” from Saudi Arabia to him.

Najib said this while testifying in his trial involving 25 charges and over 1Malaysia Development Berhad’s (1MDB) RM2 billion which allegedly entered his bank accounts.

Najib’s lead defence lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah said the prosecution had suggested that there were discrepancies in Najib’s previous court testimony, as his written witness statement had interchangeably referred to the money sent to his accounts as “support”, “financial support”, “gift” and “political donation” from Saudi Arabia.

Najib replied: “Yang Arif, it is semantics, I could use other terms like ‘present’, ‘gift’, or something, but it all means the same.”

“They all mean the same thing,” he later added.

Previously, the prosecution had challenged Najib over the different phrases used in his testimony, suggesting that the late Saudi ruler King Abdullah had never specifically said he would give “financial” support to Najib. But Najib had disagreed to this suggestion.

Najib also explained why he did not believe that the government’s Code of Ethics for member of the administration — which applied to him as prime minister then — prohibited him from receiving donations from Saudi Arabia.

“I disagree because I didn’t believe my integrity was compromised, because it’s straightforward donation from the King, not from private company or it was not from someone that would demand something in return from me.

“I think that’s the most important thing, King Abdullah did not expect anything in return, so there was no compulsion from me. And the letter did say it’s not a form of corruption, because of that, I do not see it as contradicting the code of ethics,” he said.

Najib was referring to four letters from a purported Saudi royal named Saud Abdulaziz Majid Al Saud, which had promised to give him money as a “gift”.

The four letters were dated February 1, 2011 (promising a US$100 gift), November 1, 2011 (promising up to US$375 million), March 1, 2013 (up to US$800 million) and June 1, 2014 (up to £50 million).

All four letters had carried the same line which said “the gift should not in any event be construed as an act of corruption”, and Najib today continued to insist on his belief that these four letters promising him money were genuine letters. The prosecution had been arguing that these letters were fake and forgeries.

Asked by his lawyer Wan Azman Aiman Wan Fakhruddin about the four alleged donation letters being “almost identical” or almost the same in content, Najib merely replied: “I would say the four letters are consistent. I would be surprised if the four letters are not consistent, because coming from the same person.”

Asked by Shafee if he was the only non-Saudi leader to have received donations from Saudi Arabia, Najib said: “No, no, the Saudis are generous with their support of other leaders. I believe even the king of Spain received. I know Lebanon, Pakistan, Egypty and all these countries received donations from Saudi.”

Najib agreed those alleged donations were for the administration of the respective countries.

Najib says wouldn’t have used cheques if spending illegal money

Out of the 21 money laundering charges that Najib is facing in this trial, five of the charges are over his using of alleged illegal money in his accounts by issuing cheques worth more than RM22.64 million, including RM20 million to Umno.

Citing the fact that he had used the money by issuing cheques, Najib argued this meant that he was using the money “transparently” and that it was not illegal money.

“Now supposing I wanted to spend it in terms of cash and not be transparent, I could have done that. I could have asked the bank to give me the cash and nobody would know how I spent it you see, there would be no records.

“But I knew cheques would be kept for record purposes. It’s not the way for someone to behave if you think it’s: a) illegitimate money, b) you had some nefarious things in mind. You wouldn’t do that, you would certainly go to the bank, ask for cash,” he said, claiming that he was being penalised for being transparent.

Earlier when referred to the first purported donation letter, Najib said he had interpreted it to mean that the alleged promised “gift” was a form of political donation to him.

Noting that the letter had said it was up to him on how he wanted to spend the money, Najib said his cheques showed he was using it for “what’s good for the country” instead of going “shopping” with it.

“I didn’t use it to buy a yacht or a luxury bungalow or things like that, which I could have done,” he said.

Among other things, Najib claimed to have returned US$620 million of the US$681 million he received in purported donations to the purported donor’s company Tanore Finance Corp.

As for other money laundering charges which included his transfer of the remaining money from his AmIslamic bank account — which had received the billions of ringgit — to his new AmIslamic bank account, Najib denied that this meant he knew the money was illegal money from Tanore.

“If I knew it was illegitimate money, I wouldn’t put it in the same bank, I would probably put it somewhere else,” he said, questioning why he would put it in AmIslamic bank where he knew he would be monitored as a politically exposed person.

“It doesn’t make sense, because if you want to steal money — the prosecution claims I’m supposed to be intelligent — even if I’m a country bumpkin, I wouldn’t do something like that, because that’s a sure way of exposing yourself,” he said.

Najib’s 1MDB trial before judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah resumes tomorrow.