MALAYSIA: The trial of former Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin is ongoing, and this week, it took a different turn with a prosecution witness admitting that the party president and the political party were two different entities, and the party’s property does not belong to its leader.
Testifying in Muhyiddin’s power abuse and money laundering trial, banker Norazeanti Miswan was grilled by the defence counsel on several matters.
Muhyiddin faces seven charges in total, four of which are for using his position to obtain RM225.3 million ($72.5 million) in bribes linked to the Jana Wibawa project. The bribes were allegedly obtained from three companies, namely Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd, Nepturis Sdn Bhd, and Mamfor, as well as Datuk Azman Yusoff, for the party.
Three of the charges are for receiving RM200 million in proceeds from unlawful activities from Bukhary Equity, which were deposited into Bersatu’s Ambank and CIMB accounts.
During the cross-examination, the assistant branch manager at Bank Muamalat Malaysia, Norazeanti, also agreed with the defence that, despite being flagged as suspicious, transactions totalling RM19.5 million, which were channelled from a local construction firm to the former PM’s political party, were approved.
She responded to defence attorney Amer Hamzah Arshad’s question regarding the internal red flags raised over the volume and frequency of funds, which were given by Mamfor Sdn Bhd to Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) from May 12, 2021, to November 16, 2022; they were not given to Muhyiddin Yassin.
The defence also pointed out that there were cover letters from the company addressed to the party’s treasurer, informing them of the incoming donations.
A copy of the letter was forwarded to the bank. Therefore, he said there was full transparency and nothing to hide. The witness agreed.
He also highlighted that the letters were not addressed to his client, who is Bersatu’s president.
This is when the witness also agreed that the party president and the political party were two different entities, and the party’s property does not belong to its leader.
Amer Hamzah asked: “A contribution to Bersatu is not a contribution to Muhyiddin. In fact, [Muhyiddin] can’t claim that the contribution is his?”, to which Norazeanti replied Yes.
Norazeanti also agreed when Amer Hamzah asked, “Unusual transaction doesn’t [necessarily] mean unlawful transactions?”
“Just because there are internal Suspicious Transaction Reports (STRs), we can’t assume it is unlawful activity?” Hamzah followed up, and Norazeanti responded, “Correct.”
During her testimony on Tuesday (April 28), the prosecution witness testified that internal STRs were issued on all the company’s transactions (ranging from RM500,000 to RM2 million to the party), among others, as they were not in line with the nature of the company’s business.
On Wednesday, the prosecution witness said there were other transactions by the company which were flagged and that it was normal for construction companies to transact in substantial sums.
The defence lawyer asked if there were other transactions issued [questionable activity reports]? The witness said yes and agreed with the lawyer that such a company will be flagged with the STR as a safety measure for large transactions.
She further agreed that it was the prerogative of any individual or entity to spend their legitimate earnings as they deem fit, while the defence lawyer asked if donating was an offence.
