PM Najib Razak ditemuramah oleh wartawan majalah THE ECONOMIST.
Another judicial case is the murder of Altantuya, the translator. She was murdered in 2006 and two policemen were found guilty of this, two policemen who belonged to your security detail, and your personal advisor was tangled up in this affair. Do you feel that justice has been done in this case?
I want to clarify they are not my personal security detail. They work on shift. I have my own personal detail that is attached to me. I have one that guards me for a few days, then guards someone else. They would guard me and they would guard the [former] prime minister, Abdullah Badawi. They also guard foreigners who come. It’s got nothing to do with me. Throughout the trial there has been no single evidence produced, and I have sworn in the mosque, I’ve sworn publicly, as a Muslim, that I do not know her, I’ve not met her and there’s been no evidence produced, no photograph, nothing, to say that I even knew her.
Logically, if you think about it, if I am involved or was involved with her, why should she not blackmail me, why should she blackmail Razak [Baginda]? But as it was she blackmailed Razak, she never went for me, or went to my house or anything of that sort. In the court of law, you have to produce evidence. Guilt-by-association cannot be the basis of justice, anywhere in the world. You have [a] friend, don’t you? If your friend is involved, does it mean you’re involved? Exactly. You’re not involved, unless there’s evidence to indicate otherwise. Why should I be different?
But do you think justice was done in the sense that we have two [convicted] policemen—unless you believe that they just decided to do this act themselves—they were acting on some orders, and we don’t know if there were orders given?
It has to be on the basis of beyond reasonable doubt. As long as you can introduce reasonable doubt, then you cannot say someone else is responsible. I never met the two policemen to discuss this at all, and the meeting did not involve me. So it cannot come from me. Whether Razak gave the order or not, Razak is a civilian. How can a civilian give an order to a policeman? That is also the counter-argument. Whatever it is, if you want to sentence anyone, it has to be on the basis of beyond reasonable doubt. As long as you can introduce reasonable doubt nobody can be found guilty in our system, also in the British system or anywhere else in the world.