Not in Mahathir’s life will Najib be acquited

We are now at the parking lot of the Jalan Duta to hear the decision.

Many months ago, a chance meeting in Bangsar with one of the defense council claimed Najib should be absolved but Tun Dr Mahathir will not allow for it.

SRC is a low lying case to prove Pakatan Harapan allegations on 1MDB and SRC against Najib since 2015.

The 1MDB case is more difficult, long case and complex as it involves foreign money trail. It happened earlier than the SRC case which happened at the tail end.

The opinion of the defense counsel is quite prevailing and one can see social media commentators suspect the court will succumb to Mahathir’s wish.

Furthermore, there is a long list of indiscretion by AG in favour of government political leaders that lead to the belief AGC is rigging cases.

Charges are being withdrawn by AG, particularly Lim Guan Eng corruption cases and recently withdrawal of two charges on two DAP assemblymen relating to LTTE.

Decision by Coroner relating to the Inquest on death of fireman Adib led to the suspicion AG used inquest to divert investigation.

The close court of Paul Yong rape case raised issue on the independence of judges. Recently, a judge, AGC prosecutor and lwwyer were charged for corruption.

Taken that the likelihood of biasness is high, it was rumoured that government insist in getting Najib imprisoned, by hook or by crook, for their political expediency.

One source close to AGC had once revealed they intend to pun Najib on abuse of power. However, a former DPP said the best chance was ti prove for conflict of interest.

One witness and a PTD officer present in cabinet meeting testified Najib did not recuse himself on an SRC cabinet decision.

However, unlike Hishamuddin, Nazri Aziz and Khairy who recuse themselves in certain discussion involving their family members, Najib was acting on behalf government thus no personal conflict.

Lawyer A Srimurugan is of the opinion that one out of three possibilities is for partial acquital with Najib required to defend himself for money laundering but not for abuse of power and criminal breach of trust.

source : Another Brick In The Wall