Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor arrives at the Kuala Lumpur High Court April 5, 2022. — Picture by Ahmad Zamzahuri
KUALA LUMPUR, April 5 — The High Court has set May 12 for mention and to fix a date for the decision in Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor’s corruption case involving a hybrid solar project for rural schools in Sarawak.
The prosecution and defence were meant to submit their oral submissions today.
However, both parties met in chambers and decided they would reconvene on May 12 after submissions had been vetter and for High Court judge Mohamed Zaini Mazlan to fix a date for the verdict.
“The judge decided to set May 12, 2022 as the date for the case to be mentioned and to set a decision date,” deputy public prosecutor Poh Yih Tinn told reporters when met.
On February 23, the defence closed its case after calling two witnesses, Rosmah and former director of the First Lady of Malaysia (FLOM) division, Datuk Seri Siti Azizah Sheikh Abod.
Justice Zaini had set today to hear oral submissions from both the prosecution and defence.
Rosmah had submitted a 376-page defence while the prosecution’s was 32 pages.
On February 18 last year, Rosmah, 70, was ordered to enter her defence over the three charges after the prosecution succeeded in proving a prima facie case against her.
She faces one charge of soliciting RM187.5 million and two counts of receiving bribes totalling RM6.5 million from Jepak Holdings Sdn managing director, Saidi Abang Samsudin.
The bribes were allegedly received through Rizal, as a reward for helping Jepak Holdings secure the Hybrid Photovoltaic Solar System Integrated Project as well as the maintenance and operation of diesel generator sets for 369 Sarawak rural schools worth RM1.25 billion from the Education Ministry through direct negotiation.
Rosmah’s husband Datuk Seri Najib Razak did not take the stand in this trial.
Rosmah’s lawyers argued in their submission at the end of the defence case that the prosecution had completely failed to adduce evidence that the accused (Rosmah) had indeed solicited and received any gratification from Saidi.
It further said the prosecution continued to find the accused at fault without any basis and evidence although the prosecution itself admitted that the accused occupied no official position in the government.