皇冠官方app(www.huangguan.us)是皇冠现金网官网线上投注平台。皇冠官方app开放皇冠体育信用网和皇冠体育现金网代理申请、皇冠体育信用网和皇冠体育现金网会员注册、线上充值线上投注、线上提现、皇冠官方app下载等业务。

首页体育正文

欧博会员开户:Shafee asks for one week to grill witness in 1MDB trial

admin2022-12-0811欧博Allbet

欧博会员开户www.aLLbet8.vip)是欧博集团的官方网站。欧博官网开放Allbet注册、Allbe代理、Allbet电脑客户端、Allbet手机版下载等业务。

Lead defence counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah (centre) contends that a recording of disgraced former prime minister Najib Razak talking to a Saudi royal is inadmissible due to the manner in which it has been submitted into evidence. – The Malaysian Insight file pic, December 6, 2022.

THE defence team in jailed former prime minister Najib Razak’s 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) trial will take about a week to conduct cross-examination of Joanna Yu, the former AmBank relationship manager who handled Najib’s accounts, according to Najib’s lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

In proceedings today at the High Court in Kuala Lumpur, he informed Judge Collin Lawrence Sequerah he will start the cross-examination tomorrow.

Previously, Yu had testified about how Najib’s AmBank private accounts came to be set up and how fugitive businessman Low Taek Jho, or Jho Low, had approached AmBank in 2009 for an “unprecedented” RM10 billion bond issuance, with a 30-year tenure for 1MDB’s predecessor Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA).

Today, the court also heard submissions from Shafee and senior deputy public prosecutor Gopal Sri Ram on the admissibility of the audio recording between Najib and a Saudi royal as evidence in the trial.

Shafee argued that Najib’s right to a fair trial might be violated if the court allowed the admission of his private conversation with the Saudi monarch, because he alleged the recording may have been subject to tampering.

,

足球分析www.99cx.vip)是一个开放皇冠体育网址代理APP下载、皇冠体育网址会员APP下载、皇冠体育网址线路APP下载、皇冠体育网址登录APP下载的官方平台。足球分析上足球分析专家数据更新最快。足球分析开放皇冠官方会员注册、皇冠官方代理开户等业务。

,

“Applying the ratio to our case, if the compliance with the law governing the admissibility of the documentary evidence is not complied with, the accused is placed at a disadvantage because the evidence will not be excluded.

“Even worse, there is no mode for the accused to raise any objection in relation to its non-compliance because of the purported wordings and interpretation of section 41(A) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009.

“The prosecution had abused the court process by not including the intercepted communication under section 43, but instead used a back door by forcing the court to accept “document evidence” under section 41(A),” he said. 

Shafee reiterated that it was unconstitutional to accept the audio recording under section 41(A), as it does not use the provisions of the Evidence Act 1950.

Section 41(A) of the MACC Act states that any document or a copy of any document obtained by the MACC shall be admissible as evidence, notwithstanding anything to the contrary in any other written law.

The prosecution, yesterday, argued that it will be difficult for it to bring corrupt individuals to justice, if it has to stick to the rules governing the Evidence Act.

,

约搏以太坊单双博彩游戏www.eth0808.vip)采用以太坊区块链高度哈希值作为统计数据,约搏以太坊单双博彩游戏数据开源、公平、无任何作弊可能性。

网友评论

最新评论

热门标签