Najib, in his 1MDB hearing, said there were no Cabinet meeting minutes to indicate that Husni disagreed with the federal government taking over the Terengganu Investment Authority (TIA) in 2009.
He added that every Cabinet member was provided with an agenda outlining the matters to be discussed at the weekly meeting.
“He did not voice objections or concerns or even suggested (during Cabinet meetings) that the federalisation (of TIA) be paused for a feasibility study,” Najib told the High Court here.
He said he did not remember whether Husni had met him privately in 2009 to discuss carrying out a 1MDB feasibility study.
Husni earlier told the court that he had cited the risks of setting up 1MDB but that Najib had said “I will go ahead (and establish 1MDB)”.
Najib told the court a feasibility study was unnecessary in this case because 1MDB was not a newly formed company, but “simply a rebranding of TIA”.
“Minister of Finance Incorporated (MoF Inc) already held a golden share in TIA (previously). A feasibility study would be needed if MoF Inc did not hold any special shares in the company,” he said.
Najib claimed that Husni’s testimony was a self-serving attempt at distancing himself from the 1MDB scandal or “to overplay my purported involvement in 1MDB”.
Najib named former 1MDB management members – ex-CEO Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi, Hazem Abd Rahman, former CFO Azmi Tahir and former general counsel Jasmine Loo – as those who should be held responsible for the company’s affairs.
“It is convenient for them to place the blame on me to shield themselves from criminal liability. They executed and participated in Low Taek Jho’s (Jho Low) plans,” he added.
When asked by his lawyer Shafee Abdullah if he had heard the terms “working in silos” and “need-to-know basis,” Najib said these were applicable only in the context of government work, as some matters fell under the Official Secrets Act.
“Obviously you can’t share (everything) with the whole office,” Najib said.
However, Najib added, these terms did not apply to 1MDB matters.
Shafee had pointed out that Shahrol had used these terms in his witness statement.
Najib insisted that the entire 1MDB case – from the investigations to the charges brought against him – was flawed, as the investigating officers never asked him fundamental questions.
“As a suspect, when you provide (the investigating authority) an answer, they have to probe and then decide to charge you. A fair trial premised on a fair investigation.”
Najib is charged with 25 counts of money laundering and abuse of power over the alleged misuse of 1MDB funds amounting to RM2.28 billion deposited into his AmBank accounts between February 2011 and December 2014.
The hearing continues before Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah.