Malaysia’s ex-PM Najib files appeal against 1MDB conviction

Sign up now: Get insights on the biggest stories in Malaysia

(FILES) Former prime minister of Malaysia Najib Razak looks on as he is escorted by prison officers during an appeal hearing at the Kuala Lumpur High Court in Kuala Lumpur on April 17, 2024. Jailed former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak faces a make-or-break week from December 22, 2025 as a second court battle over his role in the country's 1MDB mega-corruption scandal draws to an end. (Photo by Mohd RASFAN / AFP)

Former Malaysian premier Najib Razak was found guilty of four power abuse charges and 21 money laundering charges involving RM2.28 billion (S$724 million) linked to 1MDB funds.

PHOTO: AFP

Follow topic:

KUALA LUMPUR – Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak has filed an appeal at the Court of Appeal against

his conviction and sentence

in the RM2.28 billion (S$724 million) 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) case.

His lawyer Muhammad Farhan Muhammad Shafee confirmed that the notice was filed on Dec 29.

On Dec 26, the High Court found Najib guilty of four power abuse charges and 21 money laundering charges involving RM2.28 billion linked to 1MDB funds. The former prime minister was sentenced to 15 years in jail and fined a total of RM11.4 billion, with a default sentence of 40 years’ jail for the power abuse charges.

While no fine was imposed for the money laundering charges, the court ordered him to pay a recoverable sum of RM2.081 billion, in default of 270 months’ jail, for those charges.

Najib was charged with four counts of using his position to obtain RM2.28 billion in gratification from 1MDB funds and 21 counts of money laundering involving the same amount.

The abuse of power offences were committed at an AmIslamic Bank branch on Jalan Raja Chulan, Bukit Ceylon, between Feb 24, 2011, and Dec 19, 2014, while the money laundering offences occurred between March 22 and Aug 30 in 2013 at the same location.

Recently, on Dec 24, Najib also filed an appeal against the High Court’s dismissal of his judicial review in the case involving an addendum order, which he claimed would have allowed him to serve his sentence under house arrest.

The court rejected the judicial review, ruling it invalid and unenforceable as it was issued outside the constitutional framework. THE STAR/ASIA NEWS NETWORK

See more on