Rizal Mansor was used to fix up Rosmah Mansor
“It is not fair for an individual who was complicit or involved in the act of corruption and abuse of power to be freed from any punishment just because he turned witness for the prosecution.”
(FMT) – The authorities should investigate Rosmah Mansor’s former aide, Rizal Mansor, for other offences after he was acquitted of graft over a solar hybrid project for schools in Sarawak, says veteran journalist A Kadir Jasin.
Rosmah and Rizal were jointly charged with four counts of corruption over the RM1.25 billion Sarawak rural schools’ solar energy project in 2018.
However, the prosecution dropped all charges against Rizal two years later and made him the star prosecution witness.
In a statement, Kadir said it seems unfair that Rizal was acquitted just because he turned witness for the prosecution.
“The Attorney-General, police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) should re-investigate characters like Rizal for other offences with the aim of prosecuting them in court or confiscating assets obtained through illegal means,” said Kadir.
“It is not fair for an individual who was complicit or involved in the act of corruption and abuse of power to be freed from any punishment just because he turned witness for the prosecution.”
The Kuala Lumpur High Court found Rosmah guilty of three corruption charges linked to the project on Thursday.
The court found that she had solicited RM187.5 million from former Jepak Holdings Sdn Bhd managing director Saidi Abang Samsudin through Rizal as an inducement to help the company secure the RM1.25 billion project.
Rosmah, who is the wife of former prime minister Najib Razak, was also convicted of receiving a total of RM6.5 million in bribes from Saidi, through Rizal.
She was sentenced to serve 10 years in jail and fined RM970 million. She would have to serve another 10 years in prison if she failed to pay the fine.
Senior lawyer Gopal Sri Ram, who led the prosecution in the case, said Rosmah’s guilty verdict justified the prosecutors’ discretion to turn Rizal into a witness.
“This is prosecutorial discretion,” he told reporters after the trial’s conclusion.
“Sometimes, it is necessary for the public prosecutor to weigh the balance between who has committed the crime and whose evidence is necessary to charge an individual.”
