Al-Rajhi gold purchase controversy: The investigator who cannot remember details

KUALA LUMPUR – The criminal trial of a former Al Rajhi officer facing charges of forgery and cheating took a whimsical twist as the police officer, responsible for the case, struggled to recall crucial details relevant to the probe.

The memory lapses included the policeman’s inability to remember the forensic report findings on the alleged forged signature needed to kickstart the contentious gold purchase at the bank’s affluent branch in Bangsar on September 6, 2021.

“I don’t remember. But I do remember submitting the report to the prosecution,” Brickfields Police’s Sergeant Kamarul Humaidi Abu Hurairah told Session Court judge Datin Sabariah Othman in today’s cross-examination.

The accused, Mohd Saibulrijal Mohd Saad – a former relationship manager (special) at Al Rajhi – was charged under the Penal Code for three counts of cheating under Section 415 and two counts of forgery under Section 471.

The case involved the purchase of seven gold bars, worth RM376,110.72 using his client – Choo Lai Hock – money without the latter’s knowledge and consent that was taken from Choo’s fixed term deposit.

The court also witnessed another bout of Kamarul Humaidi’s memory failure when Saibulrijal’s lawyer, M. Hafiz Zainol Abidin, asked the investigating officer (IO) who approved the transaction involving Choo’s fixed term deposit account.

“I don’t remember,” said Kamarul Humaidi.

“May I suggest that it was done by Saibulrijal?” M. Hafiz asked.

“I don’t remember,” Kamarul Humaidi replied.

“Did you know that in this case, the cancellation of a fixed term deposit account will go through two bank officers who will review the signature and [double-check with] the account owner?” M. Hafiz followed-up.

“Yes. We called them for investigation,” Kamarul Humaidi answered.

“So, what was the outcome of the investigation?” M. Hafiz pried.

To this, Kamarul Humaidi said that the bank officers told him that the accused had “ordered” them to process the transaction.

“How did the accused order them?” M. Hafiz queried.

“He sat next to them throughout the entire process,” Kamarul Humaidi replied.

“Did you investigate what they need to do upon receiving the document pertaining to the withdrawal from the fixed term deposit account?” M. Hafiz quizzed him again.

“I don’t remember,” repeated Kamarul Humaidi.

He was also questioned by M. Hafiz on why he did not do a digital forensic verification on the CCTV recordings at Al Rajhi Bangsar Affluent Branch during the day of the incident as furnished by the bank’s headquarters.

“I didn’t do it because the subject’s [accused] face was not clear. The person in the CCTV recording was wearing a facemask,” Kamarul Humaidi explained.

However, Kamarul Humaidi disagreed when M. Hafiz mooted that his investigation was incomplete.

“When you investigated this case, did you ever doubt Choo Lai Hock [report to the police]?” M. Hafiz asked.

“No. I don’t,” Kamarul Humaidi answered.

In today’s proceeding, M. Hafiz also cross-examined another witness who was a former branch manager of Al Rajhi Bangsar Affluent Branch, who repeated her testimony on Saibulrijal’s designation which allowed him to be the sole contact person for high-profile clients.

“He is the single-touch point [for such clients],” said the witness who requested anonymity over a concern on her current employment.

“On the day of the incident, based on the transactions that were done, Saibulrijal furnished the documents to the bank officers and requested them to process the transactions,” she told the court.

She also added that Saibulrijal had, in fact, told her that he managed to convince Choo to purchase the gold bars weeks before the day of the incident.

“But I did question him back, because as far I know, Choo only wanted to do fixed term deposits. However, he told me he managed to persuade Choo,” the witness recalled.

When Saibulrijal’s lawyer, M. Hafiz, questioned the witness regarding the bank’s special treatment on its VVIP clients, she pointed out that such clients will usually be given a number of exemptions.

“They can choose not to come to the branch if they want to do transactions, such as purchasing gold bars.

“In fact, Al Rajhi [sales staff] can even go to the customer’s location to get their signature and return to the branch to do initiate such purchase,” she explained.

On May 15, witness Raja Nurul Nabila Raja Md Arif – the branch’s former relationship service manager – testified to processing the litigious gold purchase without ever meeting Choo, relying solely on her former superior’s – Saibulrijal – assurance.

In fact, Raja Nurul Nabila told the court that she was also unsure if Choo was ever present at Al Rajhi Bank’s Bangsar Affluent Branch, adding that had she known that the transaction was untrue, she would have never processed it.

The controversial purchase was approved another former relationship manager at Al Rajhi Bangsar Affluent Branch, Siti Farhana Adnan, who – in her witness testimony on May 8 – also told the court that she would not have approved it had she also known the transaction was untrue.

The prosecution was led by Deputy Public Prosecutor Sulaiman Kho whereas Saibulrijal was represented by co-councillors: Hafiz, Zabir & Rezal and Asyikin & Co.

Judge Datin Sabariah set a three-week deadline for written submissions.