‘Funds came from Jho Low, not Saudi King’

PUTRAJAYA: It was not the Saudi King who pumped RM42mil into former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account, it was actually fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho, the Federal Court has heard.

Lead prosecutor Datuk V. Sithambaram said this in his submissions at the final appeal of Najib in the SRC International Sdn Bhd case here yesterday.

He said the regularisation of Najib’s bank accounts with the RM42mil where it was clearly seen that the funds entered his accounts at specific and critical times to “magically clear” the overdrawn account and restore a positive bank balance.

Najib, in his defence, had said that the RM42mil in his bank account was manipulated and transacted by Low, better known as Jho Low, without his knowledge.

The Pekan MP said that he had thought the money was a political donation from Arab royalty.

“Every time it (bank balance) drops, they (the Saudis) will come and pay.

“The ‘Saudi King’ was none other than Low. He was the one pumping in the funds,” Sithambaram said.

He submitted that the trial judge made a finding that the origins of the Arab letters, meant to support the political donation story, was doubtful as no originals were produced in the trial.

“The only reason the appellant (Najib) maintains his belief that the funds were from the Saudi King was because of Jho Low, and this cannot be believed of a man befitting the status of the appellant as the prime minister and the finance minister.

“Just because Jho Low told him this money came from the Saudi King, he believed it,” he said.

The prosecution also said that the trial judge had conclusively found that the appellant “chose to be wilfully blind” to the money that came into his accounts.

“Wilful blindness is treated as the legal equivalent of actual knowledge,” said Sithambaram.

With the continuous flow of large amounts of money into his bank accounts, the prosecution contended that Najib ought to have at least made enquiries as to the source and legality of these funds.

“Even when the source of the funds in his accounts became the subject matter of official investigations by the relevant authorities, the appellant continued to remain passive and did not even attempt to make enquiries with AmBank or to lodge any police reports on the funds deposited. When he was told that the funds were from SRC, he again did not do anything,” he said.

The hearing resumes next Tuesday.