It was never the prosecution’s case that C4 explosives were used in the murder of Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu, the Federal Court here heard Tuesday.
Deputy Solicitor-General II, Datuk Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah submitted that the prosecution had never said the substances found at the crime scene were C4 explosives.
“We never said those explosives were those of C4. But these people from day one, said it was C4.
“We do not know how the Court of Appeal can say, it was C4 explosives. We never said C4,” he said at the hearing of the prosecution’s appeal against the acquittal of two former Special Action Unit (UTK) personnel, Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar over the murder of Altantuya.
Tun Majid said the UTK police never used C4 explosives.
Speaking to reporters later, Deputy Public Prosecutor Manoj Kurup, who assisted Tun Majid, said the substances found at the crime scene were of PETN and RDX explosives.
The prosecutor (Tun Majid) said the Court of Appeal erred on the facts in calling the explosives C4 when a prosecution witness (former Bukit Aman UTK deputy commander DSP Mastor Mohd Ariff) had testified at the trial in the High Court that UTK did not use C4 explosives.
He submitted that the Court of Appeal again erred in law and facts when it held that there was no evidence that Azilah had custody and control of explosives any time prior to his arrest without appreciating Mastor’s evidence that Azilah and Sirul Azhar had ample opportunity to possess unused explosives during training sessions.
Tun Majid also argued that DSP Musa Safri, who was the aide-de-camp to (current prime minister) Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak when he was deputy prime minister then, was not called as a witness because his role was merely to introduce former political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda to police personnel to look after the safety of his home.
He said the prosecution had also offered Musa as a witness for the defence but that was not taken up, adding that the Court of Appeal had erred in drawing adverse inference against the prosecution in not calling Musa as a witness at the trial stage.
Meanwhile, Azilah’s counsel J. Kuldeep Kumar argued that Bukit Aman’s station diary showed that Azilah was at the police headquarters during the time of Altantuya’s murder.
“The diary clearly cast a reasonable doubt as it was evidence which supported Azilah’s alibi that he was at (the federal police headquarters in) Bukit Aman and not the crime scene,” he said, adding that the Court of Appeal was right to intervene and accept the station diary as proof.
He said the High Court judge had ruled that the station diary was inadmissible as evidence.
Meanwhile, Sirul Azhar’s counsel, Kamarul Hisham Kamaruddin submitted that it was unsafe to admit as evidence on the alleged discovery of Altantuya’s jewellery at his client’s house.
He said the prosecution had ignored the fact of existence of another set of keys to Sirul Azhar’s house.
He said Sirul Azhar did not lead the police into his house to show where the jewellery was, adding that he was only called in to his house after the police discovered the items while he was waiting outside the house.
The Court of Appeal had on Aug 23, last year, freed Azilah, 37, and Sirul Azhar, 42, on the murder charge after unanimously allowing their appeals, hence, overturning their conviction and death sentence imposed by the Shah Alam High Court in 2009, which found them guilty of murdering Altantuya, 28.
They were charged with murdering the woman at Mukim Bukit Raja in Shah Alam between 10pm on Oct 19 and 1am, the following day in 2006.
Abdul Razak, 50, who was charged with abetting Azilah and Sirul Azhar, was acquitted by the High Court on Oct 31, 2008 after it (the high court) held that the prosecution failed to establish a prima facie case against him.
Hearing before the five-member panel led by Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria continues Wednesday. – Bernama
