KUALA LUMPUR - The prosecution in Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MBD) trial told the High Court here that Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) analyst Adam Ariff Mohd Roslan’s testimony on the flow of money in 1MDB was based on his analysis on the former premier’s bank statements as well as other documentation.
Deputy public prosecutor Ahmad Akram Gharib said the prosecution never called Adam Ariff, 29, who is the 47th prosecution witness to be testified as an expert witness.
"He is a witness of fact. Failure to cross-examine would amount to acceptance of the facts stated by him. Simple as that," said the prosecutor.
The matter was raised after Najib’s lead counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah told the court that Adam Ariff was not an expert witness, thus the witness’ testimony is therefore not relevant.
"My Lord, I'm wondering in the light of the witness' admission that he is not an expert witness, whether this is an appropriate time to submit that what he has testified is not relevant, because he has expressed his opinion in a report.
"He's now saying he only analysed and that analysis can be undertaken by anyone with a great deal of patience. As Yang Arif is aware, Section 45 of the Evidence Act 1950, only expert witnesses can express opinions," said the lawyer adding that time would be saved if the court were to find that Adam Ariff is not eligible to testify on the 1MDB money trail as the investigating officer could have done it.
Earlier, the witness himself confirmed that he is not appearing as an expert witness in the trial but is testifying as an analyst in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission's (MACC) 1MDB task force.
At this juncture, judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah interjected that such arguments on the Evidence Act can be submitted at the end of the prosecution's case when submissions are made.
After a short break, Muhammad Shafee then continued to cross-examining Adam Ariff.
During cross-examination by Muhammad Shafee, the witness stood by his money trail report even though the lawyer kept contending that Adam Ariff did not have sufficient documents to come to a conclusion on the issue of a sum of US$20,000,000 credited into Najib’s account at Ambank, specifically AmPrivate Banking-MR ending with 694.
When asked by the lawyer, Adam Ariff confirmed that the MACC did not furnish him with any document in relation to Riyad Bank, which was held under the name "HRH Prince Faisal bin Turki Al-Saud/HRH Prince Saud bin Abdulaziz Al-Saud”.
The Riyad Bank account transferred the funds to Najib's account within one to three days after Good Star, an entity that belonged to fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho, transferred the funds to Prince Faisal's account.
In his money trail report for the Good Star phase, Adam Ariff stated that a sum of US$20,000,000 was credited into Najib’s account in two tranches from Good Star account in Riyad Bank on Feb 24 and June 14, 2011.
Muhammad Shafee: Then you cannot make a conclusion in a scientific way that the US$10 million on two occasions originated from Good Star.
Adam Ariff: In a scientific way, no.
Muhammad Shafee: So it is an opinion based on intelligent guesswork?
Adam Ariff: I disagree. I don't have the evidence on that bank account, but I do have evidence prior to and after the transfer, and feel as an analyst that evidence is sufficient.
Najib, 70, faces four charges of using his position to obtain bribes amounting to RM2.3 billion belonging to 1MDB and 21 charges of money laundering involving the same amount.
The trial before Justice Sequerah continues tomorrow. - BERNAMA