KUALA LUMPUR — The Court of Appeal today allowed applications by former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s wife, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, to adduce additional evidence in her appeal against her corruption conviction, paving the way for the evidence to be heard by the High Court.
A three-member panel comprising Justices Choo Kah Sing, Azhahari Kamal Ramli and K. Muniandy allowed both applications before it and ordered that the additional evidence be taken before another High Court judge.
Justice Choo, who read the panel’s decision, said the court was satisfied that the requirements for admitting the additional evidence had been met.
“The evidence should be admitted if it could not, without reasonable diligence, be obtained at trial, is relevant, credible, and capable of belief.
“If the evidence admitted could lead to a different outcome, these principles have been consistently applied here,” he said.
The additional evidence will be taken through further cross-examination and re-examination of prosecution witness PW16, Rayyan Radzwill Abdullah, with any other evidence introduced by either side restricted to matters connected with that evidence.
He said the evidence should be taken by the High Court within two weeks of today’s decision, subject to arrangements.
On relevance, he said the additional evidence directly concerned Rosmah’s alleged knowledge and the role of Rizal Mansor, as well as the credibility of Rayyan’s testimony.
The court was told today that Rayyan had given his testimony under duress.
Rosmah’s lawyers were Datuk Jagjit Singh and Datuk Akberdin Abdul Kader.
Justice Choo said the court was not determining the truth of the new evidence at this stage, but whether it was necessary and capable of belief.
He said that if the additional evidence was ultimately accepted as true, it could materially affect the appeal.
The prosecution objected to the applications on grounds including the delay and timing following the death of former lead prosecutor Datuk Sri Gopal Sri Ram.
Justice Choo said those issues could be addressed when the evidence was tested.
“The applications are hereby allowed and the additional evidence shall be taken by the High Court before another Judge.”
