FOLLOWING the High Court’s finding that Datuk Seri Najib Razak is guilty on all charges involving the misappropriation of RM2.3 billion from 1Malaysia Development Berhad, the former prime minister’s defence mounted a final appeal for leniency, urging the court to temper punishment and impose concurrent sentences.
In mitigation submissions delivered on Najib’s behalf, The Edge cited that his lead counsel, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, argued that the offences arose from the same “factual matrix” and should therefore attract moderated punishment.
He told the court that the charges were closely connected and formed part of a continuous transaction.
“The offences are interrelated, the conduct part of a continuous transaction, and the punishment should therefore reflect that unity. To impose consecutive terms would be to punish the same factual complex multiple times,” Shafee said.
He asked the court to impose the minimum custodial sentence permitted by law, with all prison terms running concurrently, and for any fine to reflect Najib’s present means and personal circumstances.
“We ask for leniency and any fine to be imposed to take place concurrently,” The Edge cited him saying, marking the end of the defence’s mitigation.
Earlier, Shafee had also sought for any sentence imposed in the 1MDB case to be backdated and run alongside Najib’s existing sentence in the SRC International case. He drew parallels with that conviction, where Najib was sentenced to a cumulative 72 years’ imprisonment but required to serve only 12 years.
In a wide-ranging mitigation, Shafee sought to shift responsibility away from his client, insisting that Najib had not been involved in the day-to-day corporate management of 1MDB.
“He was the prime minister and ultimate figure in the Ministry of Finance,” he said, arguing that failures by the 1MDB board of directors were a key factor behind the scandal.
He questioned why other figures linked to the fund, including financier Low Taek Jho and former 1MDB executives Shahrol Halmi, Hazem Abdul Rahman and Azmi Tahir, had yet to face what he described as equal accountability.
Shafee also criticised the lack of success in bringing Low back to Malaysia, noting that the Interpol Red Notice system had not been utilised.
“In a civilised system we want a judicial system to be respected,” Shafee said, adding that “there are others who are truly guilty and have not seen action taken against them”.
The lawyer further argued that the prosecution had failed to fully explain what became of the US$620 million that Najib returned, claiming that only about US$60 million was used by his client.
Shafee also urged the court to consider Najib’s age and health, saying deterrent punishment should not weigh heavily on someone over 70.
“The imprisonment would make the period more arduous,” he said, adding that Najib suffers from serious ulcers and bleeding that could lead to a stroke or heart attack, as well as knee problems.
He stressed that Najib had cooperated fully with authorities since 2015, allowing the formation of a bipartisan Public Accounts Committee to investigate 1MDB.
Shafee maintained that, unlike other leaders, Najib had not interfered in investigations, while accusing Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim of interfering in probes that led to Najib’s conviction.
“We have a complaint against the investigation. He has never been given the time or day to rebut as by the time he had taken his statement, he was immediately charged,” Shafee said.
In further submissions, the defence highlighted Najib’s political record and reforms at government-linked companies, and reiterated claims that he had not received a fair trial in earlier cases.
Shafee noted that Najib intends to appeal against the latest conviction and is also challenging a recent High Court decision rejecting his bid to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest.
With the defence’s mitigation concluded, the proceedings moved to submissions by the prosecution, led by Datuk Akram Ahmad Gharib, as the court prepares to determine sentencing in one of the most consequential corruption cases in Malaysia’s history. - December 26, 2025
