KUALA LUMPUR – The prosecution is wrong to presume that former deputy prime minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi was determined to use his former executive secretary Mazlina Mazlan @ Ramly as a scapegoat for his “mess”, the high court heard today.
Defence lawyer Hamidi Mohd Noh said there is indeed evidence that the mess was created by Mazlina, the 90th prosecution witness (SP90), as reflected during cross-examination in Zahid’s trial over Yayasan Akalbudi funds.
“Should this court take one step further in determining her credibility as a witness, the defence submits that Mazlina is not a credible witness due to her inconsistent representation of facts, her frailty in recollecting and describing events of the past, and her demeanour during the cross-examination.
“Due to ample evidence of Mazlina being incompetent, the defence urges the court to scrutinise her evidence with great care and suspicion, to sieve through the evidence, and to ascertain which part of the evidence incriminating the accused can be accepted.
“It is not our intention to make her a scapegoat; we also knew from the prosecution that she was the cause of this,” he said in his submission at the end of the prosecution’s case before judge Datuk Collin Lawrence Sequerah.
Hamidi said the defence submitted that the challenge on Mazlina’s competency is made on the basis that it is her duty to manage the financial matters of both Yayasan Akalbudi and the accused personally.
“Mazlina should be able to consistently account for her course of duties. Therefore, her ignorance to act fitting to her role should not reflect in her favour. The prosecution disregarded the fact that Mazlina admitted that she knew the stamp signature should be used only for bulk certificates and festive greeting cards.
“Despite knowing this, Mazlina carelessly used the stamp signature for cheques,” said the lawyer, adding that the prosecution appears to have ignored evidence adduced during the trial.
Hamidi submitted that his client is a very busy man, and had left Mazlina to handle his financial affairs.
On Zahid’s criminal breach of trust charge involving RM10 million given to Armada Holdings Sdn Bhd, he contended that the company returned the sum together with RM69,722.65 in interest to Yayasan Akalbudi, which is owned by his client.
Thus, the allegation of CBT does not stand, he said.
On the CBT charge involving the use of Yayasan Akalbudi funds to make a RM1.3 million “donation” to police’s football association, he said based on the evidence given by SP19 (Datuk Zul Hisham Zainal), the intention behind the issuance of that cheque was solely as a donation – essentially to pay the wages of football players in need of financial help.
“There is no CBT if all the other trustees knew of the donation, and did not raise objections to the said payment.”
Hamidi argued that the RM1.3 million cheque signed off on by Zahid was for a payment allowed by the Yayasan Akalbudi constitution, otherwise known as the memorandum and articles of association (M&A).
“Our response, other than the fact it was a donation, which is allowed by the M&A, is that there is no CBT because the trustees themselves knew about the donation to police’s football association. They knew and never raised any objections.”
Sequerah then said the overall intention of the donation has to be to “eradicate poverty”, which is the main objective of Yayasan Akalbudi.
Hamidi said it is indeed poverty, as the football players had not received their salaries for some time.
Zahid, 68, faces 47 charges – 12 of CBT, eight of corruption and 27 of money laundering – involving tens of millions of ringgit belonging to Yayasan Akalbudi.
The defence will continue with its submissions tomorrow. – Bernama, September 8, 2021
