Fadley Faisal

Jonathan Caplan, QC of the prosecution team yesterday cross-examined Haji Nabil Daraina bin Pehin Udana Khatib Dato Paduka Seri Setia Ustaz Haji Awang Badaruddin, in the ongoing trial against him and Ramzidah binti Pehin Datu Kesuma Diraja Colonel (Rtd) Haji Abdul Rahman.

Section 165 of the Penal Code criminalises a public servant in obtaining a valuable thing without or inadequate consideration, from a person concerned in proceedings or business transacted by a public servant.

The Public Officers (Conduct and Discipline) Regulations prohibit public servants and their families from receiving presents other than gifts given by personal friends or relatives. These laws were highlighted by Caplan and Haji Nabil Daraina, who said he was aware of the law.

Haji Nabil Daraina maintained that if necessary, precautions are taken, for example, by reporting the gift received by a superior officer in the government and given the clearance to keep the gift, there should be no problems with the authorities that large amounts of cash were paid into his

bank account. He said he advised Ramzidah to report the receipt of the cash gift from the Malaysian woman to the then Chief Justice, and he believed that she had done so. He even reminded her to report to her superior again on other occasions between 2000 and 2017.

When asked by the prosecution what he would have told the authorities regarding the large sums of money in his bank account including the BND2.5 million that Ramzidah was said to have received from her late brother, Haji Nabil Daraina replied that he would say he was not the recipient of the cash, as it was a gift to his wife.

Haji Nabil Daraina said that prior having to declare their assets for the investigation into the case, he did not know how much money Ramzidah received as gifts. It was only later on that he found out she received BND7.5 million as gifts from both the Malaysian woman and her late brother, but he added that he never knew where she kept the money. She would tell him that there was money to spend when they went on their shopping sprees or to buy cars.

Haji Nabil Daraina said that he did not know how much money they spent over the years between 2002 and 2018, until an officer at the Anti-Corruption Bureau gave evidence of her financial analysis over the defendants’ incomes and spending.

Haji Nabil Daraina said he was not in control of the money in his joint bank account with Ramzidah. Caplan highlighted the patterns of the funds deposited into their local joint accounts, followed by a substantial fund transfer to Ramzidah’s bank account in the United Kingdom and to the defendants’ joint accounts. According to Haji Nabil Daraina, his wife would tell him that she intended to make the fund transfers but they did not discuss the decisions in doing so.

On March 6, 2013, a deposit of BND150,000 was made into their joint bank account recorded as ‘From Parent’ in the bank statement. When asked during cross-examination, Haji Nabil Daraina said that the money could have come from his parents-in-law. He never asked Ramzidah of the money deposited into their account, but sometimes he would tell her.

Further substantial deposits into their joint bank accounts were also highlighted and questioned by Caplan. According to Haji Nabil Daraina, most of the deposits made were by Ramzidah and were her own savings of money received from the Malaysian woman. However, between November 2011 and December 2016, BND670,000 was deposited into the joint bank account which Haji Nabil Daraina said was most likely deposited by Ramzidah from her parents and family members. He could not answer if he had asked her where the money came from, because he did not make the deposits.

Records on the bank statements show that between July 2013 and May 2015, almost BND2 million was deposited into their joint bank account and the source of these funds were sale of property or land. Haji Nabil Daraina agreed that if it was property sold by Ramzidah, he would have known but he had no recollection of any sales made by either of them. When Caplan suggested that the money came from withdrawals by Ramzidah from Official Receiver’s accounts at Bank A, Haji Nabil Daraina said he did not know, as he had never done bankruptcy cases before and did not know how the OR’s accounts are managed. He had no knowledge of how large the amounts of money were in the accounts.

According to the bank statement, large sums of cash were deposited into the defendants’ joint bank accounts on June 26, 2015.

Haji Nabil Daraina recalled going to the Cash Deposit Machine at around midnight to make the deposit, claiming that it had to be done at that particular time because there is a cash limit for those machines which would be reset at midnight.

Tax refund receipts from shopping sprees of GBP64,280 at Harrods and GBP13,777 at Selfridges United Kingdom were brought into question. When asked where the defendants’ fund came for these spendings, Haji Nabil Daraina said he believed it came from the Malaysian woman.

Caplan stressed that the existence of cash from the Malaysian woman is untrue, but Haji Nabil Daraina disagreed.

The prosecution said there are no documents to support any transactions showing the BND2.5 million received from Ramzidah’s brother, and Haji Nabil Daraina agreed that there are no documents aside from his wife’s statutory declaration. Justice Gareth John Lugar-Mawson adjourned the trial to continue with the cross-examination of Haji Nabil Daraina on November 4.

Caplan and Deputy Public Prosecutors Hajah Suhana binti Haji Sudin, Hajah Suriana binti Haji Radin, Dayangku Didi-Nuraza binti Pengiran Haji Abdul Latiff and Muhammad Qamarul Affyian bin Abdul Rahman appeared for the Public Prosecutor. Simon Farrell, QC and Sheikh Noordin Sheikh Mohammad represented the defendants.