Kota Kinabalu: Former Sabah Railway Department chief engineer Ismail Ahmad, who is facing money laundering charges together with his two wives, acknowledged that documents supporting his claims of share trading, personal loans and other sources of income had not been produced before the Special Corruption Court.
The admission was made during continued cross-examination by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Haresh Prakash Somiah before Judge Andi Razalijaya A. Dadi.
Ismail agreed that he had not produced documents to show that he owned a Central Depository System (CDS) account or a trading account with Bursa Malaysia, despite claiming that share trading was among the reasons he borrowed money between 2013 and 2016.
He also acknowledged that his witness statement did not disclose the types of shares he allegedly traded.
The prosecution further questioned Ismail on a series of personal loan agreements relied upon in his defence.
Ismail agreed that he had no document before the court to prove he had received RM30,000 from Othman Ahmad under a personal loan agreement, although he disagreed with the prosecution’s suggestion that the timeline stated in his witness statement was inaccurate.
The court also heard that Ismail had drafted the personal loan agreements marked as defence exhibits D5(A) to D5(G) and admitted there were errors in the identity card numbers of his two wives in two of the agreements.
On another alleged personal loan, Ismail agreed that his witness statement did not specify when he received the remaining RM130,000 from Afdul Mutalib, and acknowledged that only Afdul could confirm the details.
Haresh also continued questioning Ismail on rental income allegedly managed by property agent Mailis Sungian.
Ismail maintained that Mailis managed properties in Kota Kinabalu, Papar, Kudat and Beaufort, collected rental payments and was paid a 10 per cent commission.
He estimated that he paid Mailis about RM10,000 in commission in 2016 but admitted there was no document before the court to prove the payment.
Ismail also agreed there was no documentary proof that he received RM166,800 in rental payments from Mailis in 2016 for properties allegedly rented out by the latter.
He further maintained that all 26 properties listed in his witness statement were rented out through verbal agreements.
The prosecution later referred Ismail to his declaration made to the MACC and suggested that his claim that tenancy agreements had been seized during a MACC raid was inconsistent with his evidence that the properties had been rented out through verbal arrangements.
Ismail disagreed.
Haresh also questioned Ismail on income allegedly generated from oil palm land managed by his second wife.
Ismail admitted that he had not produced any evidence, apart from the land title, to show that the land generated income from oil palm cultivation.
The prosecution further suggested that Ismail’s explanations regarding rental income and personal loan agreements were only raised for the first time during the defence stage of the trial.
Ismail agreed.
Haresh also suggested that Ismail claimed to have received rental payments in cash because he knew the money deposited into his HSBC and OCBC joint accounts came from unlawful sources.
Ismail disagreed.
Cross-examination later continued by DPP Nurul Izzati Sapifee, who questioned Ismail on his relationship with a supervisor identified as William, his control over joint HSBC and OCBC accounts with his wives, and insurance maturity payments.
Ismail agreed that he had full control over the joint accounts, saying they were opened mainly for loan applications.
He also acknowledged that although he claimed to have received insurance maturity proceeds from his parents, he had not produced their bank statements to support the claim despite having several years to obtain the documents since the trial began.
Ismail further agreed that he did not mention in his declaration to the MACC that he had received insurance proceeds from his late father, and acknowledged that the explanation was only raised during the defence stage of the trial.
Haresh later resumed his cross-examination, questioning Ismail about cash allegedly kept in safes at the homes of his two wives, his dealings with Investigating Officer Paiwah Rahima, and the role of Mailis in his defence.
Ismail agreed that he had not informed the investigating officer about the existence of the safes or explained every transaction involving the HSBC and OCBC accounts during the investigation.
The prosecution also suggested that Mailis’ role in collecting rentals, renting properties and advancing personal loans had never been disclosed to investigators.
Ismail disagreed, saying Mailis had been mentioned.
Haresh further pointed out that deposits into the HSBC and OCBC joint accounts exceeded Ismail’s annual salary in 2016 and suggested that his evidence was merely an afterthought unsupported by documentary evidence.
Ismail disagreed.
During re-examination, defence counsel Zahir Hussien Ahmad Shah asked Ismail to clarify why he had repeatedly agreed during cross-examination that tenancy agreements, bank statements, rental ledgers and other supporting documents were not before the court.
Ismail explained that he agreed because the documents were unavailable, maintaining that they had been confiscated by the MACC during a raid on his house.
Ismail is jointly charged with his first wife, Muhilim @ Masniah Buaya @ Buayie, over RM275,550 allegedly derived from unlawful activities between March and September 2016 at the HSBC Bank branch here.
He is also jointly charged with his second wife, Runtiah, over RM133,300 allegedly derived from unlawful activities between February and September 2016 at the OCBC Bank branch here.
Runtiah also faces five separate money laundering charges involving a total of RM30,000 allegedly derived from unlawful activities.
Each charge is framed under Section 4(1)(b) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, which carries a jail term of up to 15 years and a fine of not less than five times the amount of the proceeds from the unlawful activity, or RM5 million, whichever is higher, upon conviction.
Also appearing with DPPs Haresh and Nurul is DPP Shafiq Mahadi.
Representing Ismail and his wives together with Zahir are Datuk Rizwandean M Borhan and Elhanan James.
The hearing continues.
