dalam mahkamah tinggi malaya di kuala lumpur1 2 …...mar 18, 2017 · 1 dalam mahkamah tinggi...

www.scribe.com.my 1

DALAM MAHKAMAH TINGGI MALAYA DI KUALA LUMPUR 1

DALAM WILAYAH PERSEKUTUAN, MALAYSIA 2

GUAMAN SIVIL NO : S-22-94-2010 3

4

ANTARA 5

6

LOGICAL OPERATIONS CONSORTIUM SDN BHD 7

(No Syarikat : 394720-X) …PLAINTIF 8

9

DAN 10

11

1. ABDUL RAHIM BIN ABDUL RAZAK 12

(No K/P : 600915-07-5393) 13

14

2. SILVERLAKE SYSTEM SDN BHD 15

(No Syarikat : 182899-W) …DEFENDAN-DEFENDAN 16

17

TARIKH : 5.2.2015 18

MASA : 10:34 AM 19

20

NOTA KETERANGAN 21

Koram 22

Hakim

Yang Arif Siti Khadijah Bt S. Hassan

Badjenid

YA

Peguam Plaintif

S S Tieh

SST

Peguam Defendan

Pertama

Abdul Rashid Ismail

Wan Norizan

ABR

WNZ

Peguam Defendan

Ke-2

H L Choon

Elaine Siaw

HLC

ELS

23

www.scribe.com.my 2

Saksi – Saksi 1

SP-1

Singanallur Venkataraman Narayanan

SINGA

SP-2

Udhaya Kumar A/L Naranam

UDHAYA

SD-1

Razak Bin Mohd Mazlan

RAZAK

SD-2

Abdul Rahim Bin Abdul Razak

RAHIM

2

Jurubahasa - JRB Penterjemah - PTJ 3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

www.scribe.com.my 3

MULA 1

2

JRB Dengan izin Yang Arif, kes untuk sambung bicara S-22-94-2010 3

Logical Operations Consortium Sdn Bhd lawan Abdul Rahim Bin 4

Abdul Razak dan satu lagi. 5

6

SST Dengan izin, SS Tieh for the Plaintiff. My learned friends, Encik Abdul 7

Rashid Ismail for the First Defendant and my learned friends, Mr HL 8

Choon together with Miss Elaine Siaw for the Second Defendant. 9

10

ABR Yang Arif, saya minta kebenaran untuk Cik (00:00:36 inaudible) untuk 11

duduk di bahagian depan. Dengan izin, Yang Arif. (00:00:37 12

inaudible). 13

14

YA (00:00:38 inaudible). 15

16

SST My Lady, today is for continued cross examination of the witness for 17

the Second Defendant. I’m just left with one question. 18

19

SD1 20

Nama : Razak Bin Mohd Mazlan 21

Bersumpah dan memberi keterangan dalam Bahasa Inggeris 22

Masa :10:36 AM 23

24

Pemeriksaan Balas (Cross Examination) 25

Masa: 10:36 AM 26

27

SST Dengan izin. Ready, Encik Razak? 28

29

RAZAK Yes. 30

31

SST Alright, On 29 December last year during your cross examination, I 32

posed to you this one last question and the question was “Please refer 33

to Bundles B1 to B14 and the question is - is there any letter from 34

Bank Rakyat to the Plaintiff rejecting the Plaintiff’s alleged bid for the 35

Bank Rakyat project?” Now, your counsel, Mr Choon, suggested that 36

www.scribe.com.my 4

this question be reserved so that you can take your time to go through 1

the bundles. So what is your answer to this? 2

3

RAZAK There is none in all the bundles. 4

5

SST Thank you. 6

7

YA (00:02:38 inaudible) 8

9

SST Yes, that ends my cross-examination. Thank you, Encik Razak. 10

11

Masa: 10:37 AM 12

13


Masa: 10:37 AM 15

16

ABR Dengan izin. Encik Razak, please listen to my questions carefully. 17

You either answer agree, disagree or if you’re not sure, you can say 18

you are not sure or you can’t remember, you can say you can’t 19

remember and answer to Yang Arif. 20

21

RAZAK Okay. 22

23

ABR Encik Razak, the evidence given by the Plaintiff suggested that the 24

three meetings, first one at Cyberlodge Hotel, second one at MDeC, 25

Cyberjaya and then the third one is at Concorde Shah Alam. Yes? 26

Can you recall any of these meetings? 27

28

RAZAK Some of the meetings, I can recall. But some of them, I can’t 29

remember. 30

31

ABR You can’t remember? 32

33

RAZAK Yes. 34

35

ABR So do you recall the first time that you met with Encik Rahim, Udhay 36

and Narayanan? 37

www.scribe.com.my 5

RAZAK Yes, we met. 1

2

ABR Yes. Do you recall where the location of the meeting? 3

4

RAZAK It’s MDeC. 5

6

ABR MDeC or Cyberlodge? You are not sure? If not sure, it’s okay. 7

8

RAZAK I’m not sure. 9

10

ABR That’s fine. At the first meeting, do you agree with me that was the first 11

time Encik Rahim introduced you to Udhay and Narayanan? 12

13

RAZAK Yes. 14

15

ABR Do you agree with me that at the first meeting, Encik Rahim was 16

merely introducing you to Udhay and Narayanan? 17

18

RAZAK Yes. 19

20

ABR Do you agree with me at the first meeting, there was insufficient 21

information for either the Second Defendant or Udhay or Narayanan to 22

make any decision regarding the Bank Rakyat project? 23

24

RAZAK Come again? 25

26

ABR Do you agree with me that at the first meeting, there was insufficient 27

information for either the Second Defendant or Udhay and Narayanan 28

to make any decision regarding the Bank Rakyat project? 29

30

RAZAK Yes. 31

32

ABR Do you agree with me that at the meeting, the first meeting, the 33

Second Defendant, Udhay, and Narayanan were merely exploring the 34

possibility of working together in respect of the Bank Rakyat project? 35

They were merely exploring the possibility of working together in 36

respect of the Bank Rakyat project. 37

www.scribe.com.my 6

RAZAK Yes. 1

2

ABR Do you agree with me that the other two meetings, the subsequent 3

two meetings that they alleged to have happened, there were also 4

meetings to explore the possibility of working together with the Second 5

Defendant, between Udhay, Narayanan and the Second Defendant, 6

do you agree with me? 7

8

RAZAK Yes. 9

10

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim did not make any 11

representations to the Plaintiff or to Udhay and Narayanan as alleged 12

by them at these meetings? 13

14

RAZAK Can you repeat back the question? 15

16

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim, that you are aware that 17

Udhay and Narayanan, they are alleging that Encik Rahim made 18

some representations. They’re saying that, you are aware of that, 19

right? 20

21

RAZAK Yes. 22

23

ABR I want to ask you, do you agree with me that Encik Rahim did not 24

make any representations as alleged by them? 25

26

RAZAK Yes. 27

28

ABR Do you agree with me that at these meetings, Encik Rahim was not 29

representing or did not represent or was not connected or associated 30

or he was not even an agent of the Second Defendant? 31

32

RAZAK Yes. 33

34

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim was not representing Bank 35

Rakyat at these meetings? 36

37

www.scribe.com.my 7

RAZAK Yes. 1

2

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim did not suggest, either 3

expressly or impliedly that he was an independent consultant 4

appointed by Bank Rakyat? Here me out again. Do you agree with 5

me that Encik Rahim did not suggest either expressly or impliedly that 6

he was an independent consultant appointed by Bank Rakyat? 7

8

RAZAK Yes. 9

10

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim was not in the position either 11

to commit or agree on behalf of Bank Rakyat or the Second 12

Defendant? He was not in a position either to commit or agree on 13

behalf of Bank Rakyat or the Second Defendant at these meetings. 14

15

RAZAK Can I ask? I mean the subsequent of commit, commit on what? 16

17

ABR Commit to any contract, Bank Rakyat contract, project. 18

19

RAZAK Okay, can you repeat? 20

21

ABR Do you agree, Encik Rahim was not in a position to commit or agree 22

on behalf of Bank Rakyat or the Second Defendant in respect of the 23

Bank Rakyat project? 24

25

RAZAK Come again? 26

27

ABR Do you agree that Encik Rahim was not in a position either to commit 28

or agree on behalf of Bank Rakyat or the Second Defendant in respect 29

of the Bank Rakyat project at these meetings? 30

31

RAZAK Yes. 32

33

ABR Do you agree that you would not have any mandate to commit the 34

Second Defendant in respect of any project at these meetings? 35

36

RAZAK Yes. 37

www.scribe.com.my 8

ABR Do you agree, Encik Razak, that Encik Rahim’s role was largely to 1

assist or facilitate the discussion between Plaintiff and the Second 2

Defendant? 3

4

RAZAK Come again? 5

6

ABR Encik Rahim’s role in this Bank Rakyat project was largely to assist or 7

facilitate the discussion between Plaintiff and the Second Defendant. 8

9

RAZAK Yes. 10

11

ABR Do you agree that Udhay and Narayanan and also the Second 12

Defendant had at some point, had already asked views from Encik 13

Rahim regarding Syariah issues and Islamic Credit Card operations in 14

respect of the Bank Rakyat project? 15

16

RAZAK Yes. 17

18

ABR Do you agree at the material time which was between September 19

2006 to February 2008, Encik Rahim was a fulltime employee of Bank 20

Islam? 21

22

RAZAK Yes. 23

24

ABR Do you agree that between September 2006 to end of February 2008, 25

Encik Rahim was not an employee or consultant or agent or advisor 26

for the Second Defendant in respect of the Bank Rakyat project? 27

28

RAZAK Can you repeat back the date? 29

30

ABR Do you agree between September 2006 to February 2008, this is 31

when Encik Rahim was employed by Bank Islam. 32

33

RAZAK Yes. 34

35

www.scribe.com.my 9

ABR Encik Rahim was not a consultant or agent or advisor or employee of 1

the Second Defendant in respect of or in connection with the Bank 2

Rakyat project? 3

4

RAZAK Yes. 5

6

ABR Do you agree that Encik Rahim was not a director or shareholder of 7

the Second Defendant? 8

9

RAZAK Yes. 10

11

ABR Do you agree that the Second Defendant is an independent company 12

with its own shareholders and Board of Directors? 13

14

RAZAK Yes. 15

16

ABR Do you agree that at the material time, it’s either the Second 17

Defendant shareholder or the Board of Directors will have the ultimate 18

decision in respect of their businesses? 19

20

RAZAK Come again the question? 21

22

ABR Do you agree that at the material time, whatever decision, business 23

decision that the Second Defendant wishes to make, it depends on 24

the shareholder or the Board of Directors, their own Board of 25

Directors? 26

27

RAZAK Yes. 28

29

ABR Do you agree that the Second Defendant had its own management 30

structure to evaluate their own business in respect of the Bank Rakyat 31

project? They have their own management structure to evaluate the 32

merits of their businesses in respect of the Bank Rakyat project? 33

34

RAZAK Yes. 35

36

www.scribe.com.my 10

ABR Do you agree that at the material time, Encik Rahim did not have any 1

apparent or ostensible or de facto authority to act on behalf of the 2

Second Defendant? 3

4

RAZAK Yes. 5

6

ABR Do you agree that the ultimate decision whether to accept the Plaintiff 7

as a subcontractor for the Bank Rakyat project was to be made by the 8

Second Defendant and not by Encik Rahim? 9

10

RAZAK Yes. 11

12

ABR Do you agree that at the material time, Encik Rahim was not an 13

employee, agent or consultant or representative of Bank Rakyat? 14

15

[00:15:00] 16

17


19

ABR Do you agree with me at the material time when you were discussing 20

or trying to secure the Bank Rakyat project, Encik Rahim was not an 21

employee or agent or consultant or representative of Bank Rakyat? 22

23

RAZAK No. Any specific date for the material time? 24

25

ABR Let’s say from September 2006 to February 2008, do you agree with 26

me that Encik Rahim was not an employee, agent or consultant or 27

representative of Bank Rakyat? 28

29

RAZAK Yes. 30

31

ABR Yes. He wasn’t, right? 32

33

RAZAK Yes. 34

35

ABR He wasn’t. 36

37


RAZAK He’s not an agent, yes. 1

2

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim did not have an apparent or 3

ostensible or de facto authority to act on behalf of Bank Rakyat? 4

5

RAZAK Yes. 6

7

ABR Do you agree that Encik Rahim did not have any influence in Bank 8

Rakyat to ensure that the Islamic Credit Card outsourcing project to be 9

awarded to the Second Defendant? He did not have any influence. 10

11

RAZAK Yes. 12

13

ABR Do you agree with me that the outsourcing project by Bank Rakyat 14

was awarded to the Second Defendant because of the Second 15

Defendant’s merits and strengths? 16

17

RAZAK Yes. 18

19

ABR Do you agree with me that the Bank Rakyat project was awarded to 20

the Second Defendant for the benefit of the Second Defendant, and 21

not Rahim? 22

23

RAZAK Can you repeat that? 24

25

ABR Do you agree with me that the Bank Rakyat project was for the benefit 26

of the Second Defendant, and not for Rahim? 27

28

RAZAK Yes, benefit for Second Defendant. 29

30

ABR Do you agree with me that all discussions and meetings which 31

resulted in Second Defendant securing the Bank Raykat project were 32

between Bank Rakyat and Second Defendant? 33

34


36


ABR Do you agree with me that all discussions and meetings between you 1

and Bank Rakyat whereby you secure the Bank Rakyat project were 2

between you, Second Defendant and Bank Rakyat only? 3

4

RAZAK Yes. 5

6

ABR Do you agree with me that Encik Rahim was not involved in any of the 7

discussions and meetings that you had, Second Defendant had with 8

Bank Rakyat? 9

10

RAZAK Yes. 11

12

ABR Do you recall that they made some references to presentation slides 13

which were for Indonesia and Kazakhstan? Do you recall that? 14

15

RAZAK Yes. 16

17

ABR Do you agree with me that these presentations were not related to 18

Bank Rakyat outsourcing project? 19

20

RAZAK Yes, not related to Bank Rakyat. 21

22

ABR Do you agree, you do recall there is this Wisma Bandar premise at 23

Jalan Tun Abdul Rahman which was leased to the Second Defendant, 24

right? 25

26

RAZAK Jalan Tunku Abdul Rahman. 27

28

ABR Tunku Abdul Rahman, yes. It was leased to the Second Defendant? 29

30

RAZAK Yes. 31

32

ABR It was leased to the Second Defendant to carry out the operation of 33

Islamic Credit Card outsourcing centre in the event that Bank Rakyat 34

project was awarded to the Second Defendant, correct? 35

36

RAZAK Yes. 37


ABR Yes, and this premise was always under the supervision and 1

maintenance of the Second Defendant, correct? It was handled by the 2

Second Defendant not by Rahim. 3

4

RAZAK Yes, handled by the Second Defendant. 5

6

ABR Do you agree that Rahim is not the owner or the person who rented 7

the premises? 8

9

RAZAK Yes, the owner is Kang Brothers. 10

11

ABR I think that’s all my questions, Yang Arif. 12

13

Masa: 10:55 AM 14

15

Pemeriksaan Semula (Re-Examination) 16

Masa: 10:56 AM 17

18

HLC May it please you, My Lady, I would like to commence my re-19

examination of the Second Defendant’s witness, Encik Razak. Encik 20

Razak, speak louder, okay? 21

22

RAZAK Yes. 23

24

HLC Encik Razak, the Plaintiff’s counsel has asked you the same question 25

many times in respect of different emails that you received from 26

Udhay, okay? 27

28

RAZAK Okay. 29

30

HLC So you received email from Udhay, I think the same question was 31

posed to you on almost every email that Udhay sent to you. The 32

question asked you was that why didn’t you send a reply to Udhay 33

asking him why was Udhay sending this proposal, information or 34

whatever else to you. Remember that? 35

36

37


RAZAK Yes. 1

2

HLC So he asked you whether you actually sent any reply and you agreed 3

that you did not send any reply to Udhay asking him why he sent a 4

proposal. So my question to you is why didn’t you ask Udhay why he 5

has been sending you these emails? 6

7

RAZAK During that time, in the initial stage of discussion, Yang Arif, and we 8

just merely met and we just knew each other and the purpose of that 9

one is more on the discussion of their proposal and for us, for 10

Silverlake to consider other suitable candidates for us to work for the 11

project or not. That is why that I’ve not submitted any emails asking 12

them why are they sending these emails to us. 13

14

HLC Please look at Bundle B1, page 134 to 155. You just look at 134 will 15

do. Bundle B1, page 134. An email dated 13.09.2006 from Udhay to 16

you, see that? 17

18

RAZAK Okay. 19

20

HLC So in this email, can you tell us what was the project funding 21

requirement that Udhay stated in the email? 22

23

RAZAK It’s RM 4 million. 24

25

HLC RM 4 million? 26

27

RAZAK Yes, RM 4 million. 28

29

HLC Can you also look at what is the total outflow that he mentioned in the 30

email? 31

32

RAZAK Yes, the subsequent of the email that mentioned that operation 33

expenses for the five years is RM 60 million and so on. 34

35

HLC So that is the part, yes? 36

37


RAZAK Yes. 1

2

HLC I think we can read the figures. 3

4

RAZAK And the total outflow is RM 22 million as what’s stated in the email. 5

6

HLC Please look at page 180, same bundle. Actually, maybe I’ll take all this 7

together at one go. Now I’m going to refer you to a series of email, 8

okay, or a list of emails, the question that I’m going to ask you is the 9

same, okay, that is whether, I mean these are all emails written by 10

Udhay for the Plaintiff to you so my question ask you in respect of all 11

these emails is the same, the question is whether in any of these 12

emails whether it refers to a discussion with you or a request by you. 13

Okay, you understand? I’m going to refer you to a list of emails and 14

the question that I want to ask for all these emails are the same as in 15

whether any of these emails refer to any discussion with you or any 16

request by you, okay? 17

18

RAZAK Are you referring to one to one email or as a? 19

20

HLC I’m going to give you the email now. So when you read the email you 21

know what I’m looking for, so I’m asking the question now. The 22

question is whether any of these emails referred to any request made 23

by you or any discussion that they had with you, okay? 24

25

RAZAK Okay. 26

27

HLC Now these emails are page Bundle B1, page 112. Have or don’t 28

have? 29

30

RAZAK Yes. 31

32

HLC No. As in whether these emails refer to any discussion with you or any 33

instruction from you, by you? Does it refer to any? 34

35

RAZAK No. Come back, your question? 36

37


HLC You look at the email. My question is whether this email written by 1

Udhay, usually, from the Plaintiff. Whether this email refers to any 2

instruction by you or any discussion that he had with you? 3

4

RAZAK There’s no instruction from me. 5

6

HLC It’s not written in the email, right? 7

8

RAZAK Yes, that’s not written in the email. 9

10

HLC So all I’m asking for is whether the email refers to any discussion with 11

you or instruction from you. 12

13

RAZAK There is no instruction from me for this email. 14

15

HLC So 156, same question. Yes? No? Page 156, the email is only two-line 16

long, you see. The email dated 14.11.2006. I’m saying whether the 17

email written by Udhay refers to any discussion with you or instruction 18

from you. 19

20

RAZAK It’s a follow subsequent is. 21

22

HLC No, Encik Razak, I am saying the email written by Mr Udhaya. The 23

email that he wrote at page 156, it’s only two lines, correct? 24

25

RAZAK Okay. 26

27

HLC Whether this email refers, whether what he wrote, refers to any 28

discussion with you or instruction by you? Because in some of the 29

emails, he will make a reference to say that as per discussed, you 30

know, as instructed, that kind of thing. So I’m asking you whether this 31

email has that kind of remark there. 32

33

RAZAK There is no mention, nothing mentioned about as per discussion. 34

35

HLC Yes, that’s it, you know. Page 180, same question. 36

37


RAZAK It has no instruction as well, on 180, alright. 1

2

HLC Maybe to make it clearer, Encik Razak, you just look at, for example, 3

page 52. This is for example, page 52. Are you there? 4

5

RAZAK Okay, page 52, yes. 6

7

HLC It says that, “Hi Razak, further to our discussion,” do you see that? 8

9

RAZAK Yes. 10

11

HLC So this email made reference to a discussion that he had with you? 12

13

RAZAK Yes. 14

15

HLC Sometimes, he also made reference to instructions given by you. 16

17

RAZAK Yes. 18

19

HLC So that’s all I’m asking. So whether in the emails that I’m asking you 20

whether it made reference to any such discussion or instruction, okay? 21

So just now we are done with 180. Now look at page 268. Same 22

question, does it make any reference to any discussion or instruction? 23

24

[00:30:00] 25

26

RAZAK No instruction. 27

28

HLC Page 314? Same thing, same question. 29

30

RAZAK There’s no instruction. 31

32

HLC 345? 33

34

RAZAK Same thing, there’s no instruction. 35

36

HLC Take out Bundle B2. 579? 37


RAZAK There is no instruction as well. 1

2

HLC 604? 3

4


6

HLC 658? 7

8

RAZAK No instruction. 9

10

HLC 686? 11

12

RAZAK The same thing, no instruction. 13

14

HLC 720? 15

16

RAZAK Same thing, no instruction. 17

18

HLC 773? 19

20

RAZAK Same thing, no instruction. 21

22

HLC B3, Bundle B3, 838? 23

24


26

HLC Bundle B5, 1715? 27

28

RAZAK 1715, there is no instruction as well. 29

30

HLC 1732? 31

32

RAZAK No instruction as well. 33

34

HLC Now, coming back to Bundle B1 now. Bundle B1, page 239. Now what 35

is this Silverlake data centre services mentioned in the email? 36

37


RAZAK Are you referring to this email? 1

2

HLC Yes. 3

4

RAZAK Silverlake is agreeable to supply the software and as proposal dated 5

on 01.09.2006, which covers the following functionalities. 6

7

HLC What is this proposal dated 01.06.2006? Who give it to who? 8

9

RAZAK Silverlake given to this Bank Rakyat. 10

11

HLC Silverlake given to Bank Rakyat. Now at that time, have you met, as in 12

01.09.2006, at that time, have you met with the Plaintiff? 13

14

RAZAK No. 15

16

HLC Now can you tell us why are you sending this email or why did you 17

send this email to Udhay? 18

19

RAZAK The purpose of this email is to ensure that they are capable to deliver 20

as what our commitment as per proposal on 01.09.2006. We are 21

exploring them as option to partner for that project and then to ensure 22

that they’d be able to deliver as what we committed to the bank. 23

24

HLC Please look at page 262. There are some words that are in bold and 25

some words that are not in bold. Who wrote those in bold and who 26

wrote those that are not in bold? 27

28

RAZAK The bold from Silverlake. 29

30

HLC The bold from Silverlake and then? 31

32

RAZAK And the non-bold is from the Plaintiff. 33

34

HLC So now in this email it says that, “Please help me to clarify the 35

following items.” And this is directed to Udhay. Why did the Plaintiff 36

seeking clarification from the Plaintiff or from Udhay? 37


RAZAK Okay, this is follow-up from their proposal, whatever proposal that they 1

submitted to Silverlake have been directed to them for clarification and 2

make sure that they would be able to shoulder the same thing what 3

Silverlake committed to the bank. 4

5

HLC Did the Plaintiff at any time, indicate to you in all these email 6

exchanges that they are not prepared to provide you with clarification 7

unless you pay them for the business procurement service fee? 8

9

RAZAK Come again? Which email are you referring to? 10

11

HLC Well, it’s just a general question for all these similar emails that you so 12

called asked for clarification, okay? So my question is, did the Plaintiff 13

at any time, in all these emails, say that they are not prepared to 14

provide you with the clarification that you sought from them or you 15

needed from them unless you pay them the business procurement 16

services fee? 17

18

RAZAK No. 19

20

HLC Please look at page 344. Now in your email, you say “Can you provide 21

me on your monthly forecast charges.” When you say “your monthly 22

forecast charges”, who are you referring to? 23

24

RAZAK “Your” is Plaintiff. 25

26

HLC Plaintiff? 27

28

RAZAK Yes. 29

30

HLC Now why do you need this information? 31

32

RAZAK The Silverlake need to know how much that the Plaintiff to charge 33

Silverlake for that if we awarded the project to them for the post-34

operation, for the initial stage of minus six months initial 35

implementation until the month of 60. That’s what the cost that Plaintiff 36

to charge Silverlake. 37


HLC Now, please look at page 631 of Bundle B2. Does this email state the 1

content of the SMS? The content of the SMS? 2

3

RAZAK You are referring to the first word, “Based on your SMS”, correct? 4

5

HLC Yes. 6

7

RAZAK No. 8

9

HLC Please look at page 685. So my question is number one, did the 10

Plaintiff, Ying Ling (00:41:55) is from the? Sorry, Ying Ling is from the 11

Second Defendant, correct? 12

13

RAZAK Yes, accountant, yes. 14

15

HLC So did the Second Defendant ask the Plaintiff to redo or revise their 16

proposal? 17

18

RAZAK Come again your question? 19

20

HLC Did the Second Defendant ask the Plaintiff to redo or revise their 21

proposal? 22

23

RAZAK The email from Ying Ling is asking for clarification on the proposal 24

submitted by the Plaintiff to Silverlake. 25

26

HLC So it’s asking for clarification? 27

28

RAZAK Yes, clarification, yes. 29

30

HLC So my question, are they asking the Plaintiff to redo or revise their 31

proposal? 32

33

RAZAK There is nothing instruction for them to on this, nothing mentioned by 34

Ying Ling for the Plaintiff to redo the proposal. 35

36


HLC Now, this clarification that you mentioned just now that Ying Ling from 1

the Second Defendant was asking for. What are those clarifications 2

for? 3

4

RAZAK This is what all the proposals, financial proposals submitted by them 5

to Silverlake and then definitely that whatever that submitted by them 6

to Silverlake have to be directed to them for clarification. 7

8

HLC So these are in respect of proposal that they submitted? 9

10

RAZAK Yes, the proposal they submitted to Silverlake. 11

12

HLC Please look at page 691. Now in your email dated 07.02.2007, you 13

said this, “Udhaya, help me for Item 3 as requested by the bank.” So, 14

why did you ask Udhaya to help you on Item 3? 15

16

RAZAK Yang Arif, definitely whatever that proposal submitted to them, we 17

have to redirect to them again and this one I need. Since they are the 18

one who come out with the penalty rate computation, I have to redirect 19

that back for the clarification. 20

21

[00:45:00] 22

23

HLC Bundle B3, page 870. Now this email from you to Udhay, it says, “Can 24

you assist me to prepare the following?” Again, why did you seek 25

assistance from Udhaya? 26

27

RAZAK As usual, they are the one who come up with the financial analysis, 28

financial proposal. Whatever thing required to redirect back to them 29

and all of this is for clarification purpose. 30

31

HLC Page 1064. Now this is your email to Udhaya? 32

33

RAZAK Okay. 34

35

36

37


HLC Now it says second paragraph, it says, “Please go through and filter 1

especially the area which will hit you during running the card 2

operation. Make sure what we propose are matched with the 3

Agreement.” The second sentence, ‘Make sure what we propose are 4

matched with the Agreement.” What do you mean by that? 5

6

RAZAK Yang Arif, as you are aware, as Plaintiff aware, we submitted the 7

proposal to the Bank Rakyat and we have a commitment to deliver to 8

Bank Rakyat on the scope and services that we submitted the 9

proposal. That’s why whatever that they propose, make sure that 10

they’d be able to deliver and match to our commitment to Bank 11

Rakyat. That is why I’m sending the email to them to make sure that 12

whatever they propose, it must be able to match our commitment to 13

Bank Rakyat. 14

15

HLC What will happen if the two do not match? 16

17

RAZAK Definitely we will not consider them to partner for the project. 18

19

HLC Now look at Bundle B4, page 1211. Okay, see that? There’s a table in 20

the email that you wrote to Udhaya, the table stretches to page 1212. 21

Who actually prepared this table? 22

23

RAZAK It’s the Plaintiff. 24

25

HLC So you are just sending the table back to the Plaintiff? 26

27

RAZAK Yes. 28

29

HLC Please look at page 1479, same bundle. Now the attachment to this 30

email is actually, looks like the draft Agreement between Bank Rakyat 31

and Silverlake. So in your email, you say that “Attached is a draft, final 32

draft copy for revision and discussion tomorrow and then to be used 33

for submission by Monday. As planned, our breakfast will be tomorrow 34

at Concorde”. So my question is that why was there a need to have a 35

discussion with the Plaintiff at that time? 36

37



2

HLC The attachment to this email is, looks like it’s a draft Agreement 3

between Bank Rakyat and Silverlake, correct? 4

5

RAZAK Okay. 6

7

HLC So you actually wrote to Rahim and Udhaya and say that this is the 8

final draft copy of the revision and to be discussed tomorrow and you 9

fixed a breakfast meeting for the next day. So my question is, why was 10

there a need to have the meeting or discussion with the Plaintiff? 11

12

RAZAK Yang Arif, as usual, they have submitted their proposal to Silverlake to 13

do the post-operation of the card business and then we are 14

considering and then we are exploring to work together with them 15

either to partner with them as to what I mentioned earlier, either to 16

partner with them, or, the option either to partner with them or do our 17

own or find another partner. So, as usual whatever thing directed to 18

them, whatever thing under their responsibility, they must ensure that 19

whatever Silverlake shoulder responsibility as per our Master Service 20

Level Agreement with Bank Rakyat they would be able to deliver and 21

capable to deliver as per our commitment to Bank Rakyat. That’s why 22

I’m sending this email for the discussion make sure that they are 23

capable to deliver as what our commitment to Bank Rakyat. 24

25

HLC So at that time, had the Second Defendant and the Plaintiff entered 26

into any agreement for the post-ops? 27

28

RAZAK No. 29

30

HLC Now please look at Bundle B5, page 1711. So you wrote here, 31

“Udhaya, kindly advise the cap on liability on this professional liability 32

and fidelity guarantee on fraud negligence.” So you are asking 33

Udhaya for advice in your email. So why did you ask Udhaya for such 34

advice? 35

36


RAZAK Yang Arif, again, it’s the same thing that our commitment to the Bank 1

Rakyat as part of our Service Level Agreement that we are 2

shouldering the risk liability or any fraud that Silverlake to shoulder the 3

liability. The same thing that since that we are, put up the option that 4

they are one of partner to run the post-operation project for the Bank 5

Rakyat. So the same question also posed to them to make sure that 6

they are aware of our commitment on the risk liability for the fraud. 7

That’s why I’m asking them that ensure that they are capable to 8

deliver as what we committed to Bank Rakyat. 9

10

HLC So please look at 1713 to 1714. Now looking at these two emails at 11

that time, had the parties as in Second Defendant and the Plaintiff, 12

reached any agreement on the post-ops services? 13

14

RAZAK Come again? Are you referring to page 1713 and 1714? 15

16

HLC 1713 to 1714. At that time, had the parties, meaning the Second 17

Defendant and the Plaintiff, at that time, had the parties reached 18

agreement on the post-ops services? 19

20

RAZAK No. 21

22

HLC Please look at 1732. Now the attachment to 1732 is found at the back, 23

quite a few pages, until 1756. Do you know what proposal is this? 24

Maybe I’ll start off by asking who submitted this proposal to who? 25

26

RAZAK The Plaintiff submitted to Silverlake. 27

28

HLC The Plaintiff submitted to Silverlake. Do you know what was the 29

purpose? 30

31

RAZAK This is for the post-operation proposal. 32

33

HLC Post-operation proposal? 34

35

RAZAK Yes. 36

37


HLC Please look at 1759 and then subsequently at page 1772, I mean 1

1759 all the way to 1771 and then 1772 until 1782. Do you know what 2

documents are these? 3

4

RAZAK You are referring to the two emails, correct? 5

6

HLC And the attachments. 7

8

RAZAK The email is seeking their clarification for the artwork, whatever we 9

committed to Bank Rakyat they’d be able to deliver as per our 10

proposal. 11

12

HLC Now move on to page 1804. Now 1804 to actually 1848. So my 13

question is that, now this was an email by you to Udhay enclosing or 14

attaching the revised back-to-back Agreement. Now when you sent 15

this back-to-back Agreement to the Plaintiff, does this back-to-back 16

Agreement represent how the Second Defendant would like to 17

proceed with the Plaintiff on this matter? 18

19

RAZAK Yes. 20

21

HLC Now did the Plaintiff agree to this arrangement? 22

23

RAZAK No. 24

25

HLC Did the Plaintiff agree to this Agreement, this back-to-back 26

subcontractor Agreement? 27

28

RAZAK No. 29

30

HLC Now, please look at page 1849. So there is this email from Kun Yin 31

(00:58:08) to a long list of people including Udhaya and Dr 32

Narayanan, okay? 33

34

RAZAK Yes. 35

36


HLC Now, what does this, okay, the content of the email it says the signing 1

ceremony and all these things, okay? Now, so Kun Yin also talks 2

about discussed kickoff framework, what is this framework or kickoff 3

framework referring to? 4

5

RAZAK This is referring to the pre-operation of the project implementation. 6

7

HLC Now Bundle B10, page 3859 to 3874. It has earlier been established 8

that this is so-called the pre-ops Agreement that has been signed 9

between the Plaintiff and the Second Defendant and has been paid 10

for, okay? This has been established earlier. So when you talk about 11

pre-ops at page 1849, are you referring to the same thing as shown in 12

3859 to 3874? 13

14

RAZAK Yes. 15

[01:00:00] 16

17

HLC I’m going to refer you to three emails and you tell us whether these 18

three emails are similarly relate to pre-ops and it’s within the 19

Agreement at 3859, okay? Now these three emails are at page 1932 20

of Bundle B5, go back to Bundle B5 just now. 1955 and 1960. 1932, 21

1955 and 1960, okay? All these are from Adrian Tan, from Second 22

Defendant, Kun Yin and 1960 is actually the response to that. Okay? 23

24

RAZAK Okay. 25

26

HLC Now, the content of these emails, so my question is the same thing as 27

in are they also relating to the pre-ops that, the same pre-ops that we 28

are talking about under page 3859? 29

30

RAZAK Yes. 31

32

HLC At Bundle B5, please look at page 1964. So (01:01:52 inaudible) sent 33

this email to you, the document as spoken to you, okay? Now then in 34

the Appendix, you will see that there’s proposed cost, there’s revised 35

cost and then there are remarks and notes. So my question is at that 36

time have these terms been agreed upon? 37


RAZAK No, if you look, there’s a lot of exchange of this. You’ll note the 1

remarks and notes column there are a lot of exchange of notes that 2

are between the both parties. 3

4

HLC So parties were still discussing these terms? 5

6

RAZAK Yes. 7

8

HLC During cross examination when you were asked question in relation to 9

the documents at page 1849, 1851 and 1927, you came up with an 10

answer, I quote and unquote, you said that, “There was a contract but 11

we were negotiating a contract.” That seems to me quite confusing 12

because you said, “There was a contract but we were negotiating a 13

contract”. Can you clarify what did you mean by what you said, “There 14

was a contract but we were negotiating a contract”? 15

16

RAZAK Yang Arif, what I mean by this contract, it’s a draft contract that was 17

submitted for them to review for these post-operation services. 18

19

HLC So what you meant was there was draft contract but we were 20

negotiating a contract? 21

22

RAZAK Yes, we were negotiating with them, yes. 23

24

HLC Please look at Bundle B6, page 2190. This is an email from Kun Yin. 25

So my question is, is this for post-ops contract or is it relating to pre-26

ops activities? 27

28

RAZAK This is pre-op. 29

30

HLC Pre-op? So when again? 31

32

RAZAK Yes, pre-op activities. 33

34

HLC If you say pre-ops, it means the Bundle B10, page 3850, pre-ops? 35

36

37


RAZAK Yes. 1

2

HLC Coming back to one more thing, Bundle B3, page 838, 838 to 869, 3

okay? 869, can you tell us what is the subject matter of this email and 4

the attachments? 5

6

RAZAK They submitted a Kazakhstan business proposal. 7

8

HLC Kazakhstan business proposal? 9

10

RAZAK Yes. 11

12

HLC So, does this have anything to do with Bank Rakyat project? 13

14

RAZAK No. 15

16

HLC Now please look at Bundle B6, page 2234. Now in this email it was by 17

Udhay to Andy, CC to you. So he says, “We thank you for acceptance 18

of the terms of the commercial issues. We seek to formalise this by 19

the end of the week, officially-appointed” and then he says “We’d also 20

like to seek Silverlake’s commitment to complete the legal contract 21

between Silverlake and IICS by the end of the month.” Okay? 22

23

RAZAK Yes. 24

25

HLC So my question is that did Silverlake and IICS or the Plaintiff complete 26

the legal contract by the end of the month? 27

28

RAZAK No. 29

30

HLC Now can I refer you to Bundle B7, page 2488? This was about less 31

than two months after the email I just referred you to 2234, just now 32

2234 is 03.01.2008, okay? So now 2488, the date is 25.02.2008. 33

Now under Item 1, it says “contractual arrangement or agreement 34

between IICS Operations and Silverlake”. 35

36

RAZAK Okay. 37


HLC Now so the first line, it says that “after receiving the agreement at the 1

end of January from Silverlake”. Just now at 2234 Udhay already said 2

let’s try to complete the agreement by the end of month which is end 3

of January, correct? 4

5

RAZAK Yes. 6

7

HLC And at 2488, it shows that Silverlake actually gave them an agreement 8

by the end of January. So what happened subsequently? 9

10

RAZAK After receiving our agreement, they forwarded our agreement to their 11

lawyer for their lawyer to review the agreement, the draft copy of the 12

agreement. 13

14

HLC I see. So at that point in time, as in the date of 2488, what was the 15

state or status of the draft agreement? 16

17

RAZAK Both parties still negotiating and discussing about the agreement, draft 18

copy agreement. 19

20

HLC So at that point in time, let’s say 25.02.2008, was there a finalised 21

agreement that was ready for the parties to sign? 22

23

RAZAK No. 24

25

HLC Please look at page 2528. So based on the content of this email, had 26

the parties agreed on all the terms for the post-ops agreement? 27

28

RAZAK No. 29

30

HLC Now, please look at page 2510. Now this is an email by Chee to 31

Udhay. It says that, “I understand from Razak that IICS is not 32

agreeable with the clause on the principle agreement with Bank 33

Rakyat.” So Chee got that information from you. Can you explain what 34

you meant by “IICS is not agreeable with the clause on the principal 35

agreement with Bank Rakyat”? 36

37


RAZAK Come back again your question? 1

2

HLC Here Chee says, “I understand from Razak that IICS is not agreeable 3

with the clause on the principle agreement with Bank Rakyat.” Okay, 4

so Chee got that information from you. So can you explain what do 5

you mean by IICS is not agreeable with the clause on the principle 6

agreement with Bank Rakyat? 7

8

RAZAK I can’t recall that. 9

10

HLC You can’t recall that? 11

12

RAZAK Yes because there’s a lot of commitment that both parties, Silverlake 13

to deliver to Bank Rakyat and then some of the things that since we 14

are considering them an option to be partner for this post-operation 15

project for Bank Rakyat and then something that we passed over to 16

them to take over and there are a lot of things that posted to them and 17

I can’t recall which is that they were not agreeable at this stage. 18

19

HLC Now please look at 2505. Now, after you raised the issue of 20

confidentiality under the Master Agreement with Bank Rakyat, okay? 21

22

RAZAK Okay. 23

24

HLC At 2505, I think, you see at the bottom email, you say that “Discuss 25

with the Management. There’s a confidentiality in the Master 26

Agreement between Silverlake and the bank”, okay? So Udhaya told 27

you this, “That issue to work around rests with you and the only advice 28

I can give is to refer to your lawyers. You might have to rewrite the 29

Agreement.” 30

31

RAZAK Okay. 32

33

HLC Okay, when Udhay said “rewrite the Agreement”, do you know what 34

Agreement he was referring to? So you raised the problem of 35

confidentiality then he came back and say the only advice he can give 36


you is to go to your lawyers and then he said that you might have to 1

rewrite the agreement. What agreement was he referring to? 2

3

[01:15:00] 4

5

RAZAK It’s the post-operation Agreement. 6

7

HLC Post-operation? So he’s asking you to rewrite the post-operation 8

Agreement? 9

10

RAZAK Yes. 11

12

HLC Please look at page 2533. Now, this one is from you to Udhay. Now 13

you say that “Attached is the revised Agreement for your revision. 14

Okay, it’s called the back-to-back subcontractor Agreement”. Is this a 15

post-ops Agreement? 16

17

RAZAK Yes, it’s the post-op. 18

19

HLC So was this Agreement signed? 20

21

RAZAK No. 22

23

HLC This particular one, no. So you have rewritten the Agreement but it 24

was still not signed? 25

26

RAZAK Not signed, yes. 27

28

HLC Okay, now please look at 2586. This is already in April. Now point 29

number 3, “We have also received the proposed Agreement between 30

Silverlake and IICS on Friday,” okay? What is this Agreement? 31

32

RAZAK Again it’s a post-op operation Agreement. 33

34

HLC Post-ops Agreement. So what did the Plaintiff say they want to do with 35

the Agreement? 36

37


RAZAK They have forwarded again to the lawyer. 1

2

HLC They have forwarded again to the lawyer. 3

4

RAZAK Yes. 5

6

HLC So at that point in time as in 14.04.2008, the date of this email, was 7

there a finalised Agreement that parties could sign? 8

9

RAZAK No. 10

11

HLC Please look at page 2680. Now this is 22.04.2008 which is about eight 12

days after the last one that I referred you just now, okay? 13

14

RAZAK Okay. 15

16

HLC So here it says, “Further to the Agreement that was proposed to IICS 17

by Silverlake on Friday, we have reviewed and happy to submit the 18

said Agreement now revised for your consideration,” okay? 19

20

RAZAK Okay. 21

22

HLC If you’ll look at the attachments, page 2680. Okay? 2680, so the 23

attachment is at page 2682 onwards. Okay? So they say that they 24

have revised it, correct? 25

26

RAZAK Okay. 27

28

HLC So did the Second Defendant accept these revisions or changes 29

proposed by the Plaintiff? 30

31

RAZAK No. 32

33

HLC Okay, now, here at Bundle B7 again, still Bundle B7, page 2651. In 34

this email, Chee said that, ‘I would like to confirm that we are 35

agreeable to split the Agreement into two.” What does that mean? 36

37


RAZAK Okay, to split the pre-op and the post-op Agreement into two. 1

2

HLC So one pre-op, one post-op? 3

4

RAZAK Yes, it’s a separate Agreement. 5

6

HLC I see. So, what is the cut-off point between the pre-ops and the post-7

op? 8

9

RAZAK The pre-op until this cutover of the system and the post-op is start 10

kickoff after the cutover system until expiry of the contract with Bank 11

Rakyat. 12

13

HLC Now, the more miscellaneous question, Bundle B10, page 3879 to 14

3888 and then 3889 to 3898, there are two documents there though 15

they look similar. Now these two documents, are they related to the 16

Bank Rakyat project? 17

18

RAZAK No. It’s for the Bank Islam Card project. 19

20

HLC Bank Islam, yes? Okay, now please look at Bundle B1, going back to 21

Bundle B1 at page 345 to I think to the end. Now, here the main issue 22

that I’m looking at is on the issue of MBF. Now first thing is that at that 23

time, do you know what MBF has proposed to Bank Rakyat? 24

25

RAZAK No, I don’t know. 26

27

HLC You don’t know, yes? 28

29

RAZAK I had no idea. I have no idea at all. 30

31

HLC So therefore, did you provide any information or data on what MBF 32

has proposed to Bank Rakyat? Did you provide any information or 33

data to the Plaintiff? 34

35

RAZAK Come back the question? 36

37


HLC Did you provide any information or data on what MBF has proposed to 1

Bank Rakyat? Those information and data, did you provide that to the 2

Plaintiff? 3

4

RAZAK No. 5

6

HLC No? Did you instruct the Plaintiff to do this comparison? 7

8

RAZAK No. 9

10

HLC Now at page 239. Now, so the first part, Silverlake data center 11

services. Now can you tell me whether under these Silverlake data 12

centre services, was there any scope that talks about operation? 13

14

RAZAK What operation are you talking? About Credit Card operation or? 15

16

HLC Yes, Credit Card operation, yes. 17

18

RAZAK Yang Arif, you can refer to the last two bullets that Silverlake will 19

design, operate that Credit Card functionality and then Silverlake will 20

manage the outsourcing of operation for the data Centre and Card 21

Centre manned by professional proven track record for the bank 22

businesses to ensure customer’s (01:25:04 inaudible) bank goals are 23

achieved. That’s two to reflect our post-operation services to the bank. 24

25

HLC So that means this proposal 01.09.2006 already included the 26

obligation on Silverlake to manage the operation, the Credit Card 27

operation. 28

29

RAZAK Yes. 30

31

HLC So it was part of the proposal on 01.09.2006? 32

33

RAZAK Yes. 34

35

HLC And that was, let me ask again, have you met the Plaintiff at that time, 36

01.09.2006? 37


RAZAK No. 1

2

HLC Now, the Plaintiff’s counsel put to you that the subsequent part of this 3

are actually derived from the proposal submitted by the Plaintiff, okay? 4

Now, if I assume that that is true, I’m not saying that it is true, if I 5

assume that that is true, why did you seek comment from the Plaintiff 6

at page 244 in the email on things that they purportedly propose? 7

8

RAZAK Page 244? 9

10

HLC Yes, you see in 244, Udhay says, “Hi Razak, my response in blue” 11

and blah blah blah. So everything that he responded he put there, 12

“Udhaya,” there’s a bracket there, “(Udhaya)”, correct? 13

14

RAZAK Okay. 15

16

HLC Now, so even the last part, he also talk about Udhaya, what is his 17

comment, okay? So my question is, if let’s say what the Plaintiff 18

counsel said is true that you derive all these details about operations 19

from the Plaintiff, now why did you seek comment or input from the 20

Plaintiff? 21

22

RAZAK Okay, Yang Arif, you look at we submitted the proposal on 01.09.2006 23

to the bank, and then this is what our commitment to the bank for our 24

deliverable for this operation for the Credit Card services to the bank, 25

and then we are exploring this option that considering the Plaintiff as a 26

partner to run at the post-operation. We are going to make sure that 27

whatever we committed, they’ll be able to commit the same thing what 28

we committed to the bank, and if they’ll be able to commit we might 29

consider a subject to the sign-off of the Agreement but if they say that 30

they will not be able to commit so we have no choice but to drop them 31

and find another alternative. That’s why I’m sending this to them for 32

clarification and commitment. 33

34

YA Actually, you are referring to which page? Can I have the page 35

number? 36

37


RAZAK 244. This is what my email and then what the response from the 1

Plaintiff. If you look under functionality, what you see in the brackets 2

that Udhay says that this is what they are able to deliver. 3

4

HLC Let’s look at Bundle B1, page 14. Now this email was dated 5

03.10.2006. So then there is an attachment, looks like some 6

Powerpoint slides at the back, okay? Now, do you know when these 7

Powerpoint slides were prepared? 8

9

RAZAK I have no idea. 10

11

HLC You have no idea? Okay, now, a lot of these emails the name of 12

Rahim appear, okay? 13

14

RAZAK Okay. 15

16

HLC The name or the email address of Rahim appear, so my question is 17

that, number 1, did you instruct the Plaintiff to include Rahim or ask 18

the Plaintiff to cc Rahim when the Plaintiff sends email to you? 19

20

RAZAK Come again, the question? 21

22

HLC Did you instruct the Plaintiff to include Rahim or at least cc Rahim 23

when they send email to you? 24

25

RAZAK No. 26

27

HLC But some of the emails that you sent, okay, somehow also have 28

Rahim in the loop. 29

30

RAZAK Yes. 31

32

HLC So why did you not remove Rahim from the mailing list? 33

34

RAZAK Because some of the email I “Reply to all”, that’s why the email carry 35

forward to the email that I reply to. 36

37


HLC When you say “Reply to all” means you. 1

2

RAZAK All the recipients either Copy or To, yes. 3

4

HLC So automatically will become part of the recipients? 5

6

RAZAK Yes, will become. 7

[01:30:00] 8

9

HLC So was there at any point in time, the Plaintiff objected to Rahim being 10

in the loop? 11

12

RAZAK No. 13

14

HLC I have no further questions. 15

16

YA Encik Razak, that’s it, thank you, you may step down. 17

18

RAZAK Okay, thank you. 19

20

Masa: 12:05 PM 21

22

HLC Second Defendant has no further witness to call and the Second 23

Defendant would like to close its case. 24

25

ABR Yang Arif, I would like to call my one and only witness, the First 26

Defendant, Encik Abdul Rahim to the stand. 27

28

SD2 29

Nama : Abdul Rahim Bin Abdul Razak 30

Umur : 55 Tahun 31

Alamat: 74 Jalan Arca, Bukit Jelutong, Shah Alam 32

Pekerjaan: Senior Advisor 33

Bersumpah dan memberi keterangan dalam Bahasa Melayu 34

Masa : 12:07 PM 35

36

37


Pemeriksaan Utama (Examination-in-Chief) 1

Masa: 12:08 PM 2

3

ABR Dengan izin Yang Arif. Encik Rahim, ya? 4

5

RAHIM Ya. 6

7

ABR Encik Rahim ada sesalinan Penyata Saksi di hadapan Encik Rahim? 8

Yang clean copy punya, yang tiada tulisan apa-apa (01:33:49 9

inaudible)? 10

11

RAHIM Tidak, saya tiada. 12

13

ABR Tiada? Encik Rahim boleh tengok, lihat Penyata Saksi ini? Boleh 14

tolong sahkan kandungannya? Baca tengok ada apa-apa, boleh 15

sahkan. Sudah baca sudah? 16

17

RAHIM Ya. 18

19

ABR Ada apa-apa pembetulan ataupun perubahan yang Encik Rahim ingin 20

hendak buat ke atas Penyata Saksi ini? 21

22

RAHIM Tidak, tidak ada. 23

24

ABR Tidak, ya? Ini, Encik Rahim sahkan bahawa ini adalah keterangan 25

Encik Rahim sendiri? 26

27

RAHIM Ya. 28

29

ABR Yang Arif, I ask this Witness Statement to be marked, Yang Arif, and 30

signed. Tolong bubuh tarikh sekali, Encik Rahim. 31

32

RAHIM Ya. 33

34

JRB Witness Statement (DWD1) SEDW2. 35

36

37


ABR Terima kasih. Terima kasih, Yang Arif. I offer him for cross. 1

2

Masa: 12:14 PM 3

4


Masa: 12:14 PM 6

7

SST Dengan izin, Yang Arif. Encik Rahim? 8

9

RAHIM Ya. 10

11

SST Boleh rujuk kepada Ikatan A, yang ini Ikatan Pliding? Saya akan 12

merujuk Encik Rahim kepada mukasurat mukasurat 77 hingga 86. 13

Encik Rahim tengok pagination pada bahagian kanan atas. Nampak 14

tidak? 77 hingga 86? 15

16

RAHIM Ya. 17

18

SST Saya rujuk Encik Rahim secara khusus kepada beberapa perenggan 19

yang berikut, ya? 20

21

RAHIM Ya. 22

23

SST Perenggan pertama, perenggan 10.4 pada mukasurat 80. 10.4 24

mukasurat 80. Yang itu, Encik Rahim baca sendiri, ya? Encik Rahim 25

sudah baca? 26

27

RAHIM Ya. 28

29

SST Seterusnya pada mukasurat 82, perenggan 14.1. Encik Rahim pun 30

baca sendiri, ya. Sudah baca? 31

32

RAHIM Ya. 33

34

SST Seterusnya mukasurat 83, perenggan 17.1. Pun baca sendiri, ya? 35

Dan akhir sekali mukasurat 85, perenggan 24.3. 36

37


RAHIM Ya. 1

2

[01:45:00] 3

4

SST Sudah baca, ya? Now, Pembelaan atau kedudukan Encik Rahim 5

adalah bahawa peranan Encik Rahim pada setiap masa adalah terhak 6

kepada memberikan Encik Udhaya dan Dr Narayanan ataupun 7

kepada Defendan Kedua komen-komen yang diminta oleh mereka 8

berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah untuk 9

perniagaan dan projek kad kredit Islam. Adakah Encik Rahim masih 10

mengekalkan kedudukan ini? 11

12

RAHIM Ya. 13

14

SST Ya. Sila rujuk kepada Ikatan B3, mukasurat 871 hingga 915. Now, ini 15

adalah emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim bertarikh 21 16

Mac. Encik Udhaya telah melampirkan dokumen yang bertajuk, 17

“Proposal for strategic alliance between Silverlake Sdn Bhd and 18

Logical Operations Consortium Sdn Bhd”. Encik Udhaya juga telah 19

menulis dalam emel itu, kalau Encik Rahim tengok perenggan ketiga, 20

dia kata, “Meanwhile you can send any feedback or comments to 21

ensure the proposal is covering all the relevant areas.” Soalan saya, 22

adakah Encik Rahim telah memberikan sebarang feedback atau 23

komen yang diminta oleh Encik Udhaya? 24

25

RAHIM 871? 26

27

SST 871, perenggan ketiga. “Meanwhile you can send any feedback.” 28

Jadi, adakah Encik Rahim telah memberikan sebarang feedback atau 29

komen yang diminta oleh Encik Udhaya? 30

31

RAHIM Pertama sekali saya ingin ulaskan sedikit, mengenai emel address ini 32

ialah emel address personal, Yang Arif, [email protected] ini. Jadi 33

pada ketika itu, saya gunakan Streamyx sebagai salah satu cadang 34

macam mana saya hendak mendapatkan emel. 35

36

37


YA Encik Rahim, explanation later, just answer the question. Question is? 1

2

SST Adakah Encik Rahim memberikan sebarang feedback atau komen 3

yang diminta oleh Encik Udhaya? 4

5

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti, Yang Arif. 6

7

SST Sila rujuk kepada Ikatan yang sama, B3, mukasurat 916 hingga 964. 8

Sudah sampai sana? 9

10

RAHIM Ya. 11

12

SST Ini juga adalah emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim, 13

yang ini bertarikh 25 Mac. Encik Udhaya dia ada melampirkan 14

attachment berbunyi “Proposal for strategic alliance between 15

Silverlake Sdn Bhd and Logical Operations Consortium Sdn Bhd”. 16

Now, adakah Encik Rahim ingat sama ada Encik Rahim ada 17

memberikan sebarang feedback atau komen kepada Encik Udhaya? 18

19

RAHIM Pertama, ini saya tidak pasti saya menerima emel ini. 20

21

SST Tidak pasti menerima emel ini? 22

23

RAHIM Ya. 24

25

SST Jadi maksudnya Encik Rahim tidak pasti sama ada berikan 26

maklumbalas kepada Encik Udhaya? 27

28

RAHIM Sebab itu saya ingin jelaskan sedikit. Sebab menggunakan Streamyx 29

setelah kita menukar kepada Unifi. Apa-apa emel dia hantar ke 30

Streamyx itu, saya tidak dapat hendak retrieve. Jadi untuk saya 31

memastikan sama ada pertama ini saya menerima emel ini dan 32

keduanya saya memberi sebarang komen saya tidak dapat memberi 33

penjelasan dari segi itu. 34

35

SST Tidak dapat beri penjelasan. Dalam Ikatan yang sama, B3, mukasurat 36

965 hingga 1025. 37


RAHIM Ya. 1

2

SST Ini juga adalah emel bertarikh 25.3.2007 daripada Encik Udhaya 3

kepada Encik Rahim. Encik Udhaya ada melampirkan dokumen-4

dokumen berkenaan dengan Powerpoint presentation kepada 5

Defendan Kedua berkenaan dengan cadangan untuk project Bank 6

Rakyat, yang ini untuk rujukan Encik Rahim, boleh Encik Rahim rujuk 7

kepada mukasurat 983 sebahagian daripada attachment ini 8

mukasurat 983. 9

10

RAHIM Okay. 11

12

SST Di sini, nama Encik Rahim tersenarai sebagai salah seorang 13

Pengarah dan dalam Lembaga Pengarah latar belakang Encik Rahim 14

juga ada dinyatakan di sini. 15

16

RAHIM Ya. 17

18

SST Now, soalan saya ialah adakah terdapatnya emel atau surat daripada 19

Encik Rahim kepada Encik Udhaya membantah kepada kandungan 20

Powerpoint presentation ini khususnya pada mukasurat 983? 21

22

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti saya menerima emel tersebut. 23

24

SST Tidak pasti terima emel tersebut. Jadi maksudnya tidak pasti samada 25

Encik Rahim ada buat bantahan atau tidak. 26

27

RAHIM Kalau saya, kalau beri saya jelaskan ada emel-emel daripada mereka 28

yang apabila saya after discussion dengan mereka ini, nama saya 29

telah dikeluarkan. 30

31

SST Now sila rujuk kepada bundle yang sama, mukasurat 1104. 1104 32

sehingga 1141. Encik Rahim sudah sampai sana? 33

34

RAHIM Ya. 35

36


SST Ini juga adalah emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Dr Narayanan 1

dan disalinkan kepada Encik Rahim. 2

3

RAHIM Ya, cc. 4

5

SST Bertarikh, ya, disalinkan maksudnya cc, ya, bertarikh 5 April, Encik 6

Udhaya ada melampirkan Master Service Level Agreement antara 7

Bank Rakyat dengan Defendan Kedua. Now soalan saya ialah adakah 8

Encik Udhaya meminta daripada Encik Rahim komen-komen 9

berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah? 10

11

RAHIM Tidak ada. 12

13

SST Tidak ada? Mukasurat 1142 Ikatan yang sama B3, 1142. Ini adalah 14

emel daripada Encik Rahim kepada Encik Udhaya dan Encik Rahim 15

ada salinkan emel ini kepada Dr Narayanan. Now, soalan saya ialah 16

adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Rahim tidak menulis 17

sebarang emel atau surat kepada Encik Udhaya menanya mengapa 18

dokumen tersebut diemelkan kepada Encik Rahim? 19

20

RAHIM Ya. 21

22

SST Ya. Now sekarang saya akan merujuk Encik Rahim kepada suatu 23

senarai emel-emel tetapi soalan saya adalah sama sahaja. Dia akan 24

sama sahaja. Saya beritahu Encik Rahim apakah soalan tersebut 25

terlebih dahulu, ya? Okay, soalan tersebut adalah adakah Encik 26

Rahim bersetuju bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak meminta daripada Encik 27

Rahim komen-komen berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan 28

prosedur Syariah. Yang ini soalan saya untuk semua senarai 29

dokumen yang akan saya tanya kepada Encik Rahim dari sekarang, 30

ya? You understand my question? 31

32

RAHIM Saya jawab sekali ke banyak kali? 33

34

SST Boleh jawab sekali atau the moment saya perkenalkan dokumen 35

tersebut kepada Encik Rahim, Encik Rahim boleh kata setuju atau 36

tidak. 37


RAHIM Okay. Soalannya? 1

2

SST Soalannya adalah adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya 3

tidak meminta daripada Encik Rahim komen-komen berkenaan 4

dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah. Itu sahaja. 5

6

RAHIM Itu daripada emel-emel, daripada segi emal sahaja? 7

8

SST Ya, daripada emel-emel yang saya senaraikan kepada Encik Rahim. 9

Encik Rahim faham, ya? 10

11

RAHIM Faham. 12

13

SST Jadi cuma kata setuju atau tidak setuju. 14

15

RAHIM Faham. 16

17

SST Boleh, ya? 18

19

RAHIM Faham. 20

21

SST Okay. Dokumen pertama boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 22

Ikatan B4, mukasurat 1213. Dia akan sampai kepada mukasurat 23

1222. Jadi 1213 hingga 1222. Yang ini emel, Encik Rahim sudah 24

sampai sana? Yang ini emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik 25

Rahim dan kepada Dr Narayanan. Ini emel yang pertama. 26

27

[02:00:00] 28

29

SST Jadi setuju atau tidak? 30

31

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti. 32

33

SST Tidak pasti? Okay. Dokumen yang kedua, ya. Bundle yang sama 34

mukasurat 1529 sehingga 1530. Yang ini adalah emel daripada Encik 35

Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. 36

37


RAHIM Ini emel di-forward kepada Encik Udhaya kepada saya. 1

2

SST Jadi soalannya Encik Rahim setuju atau tidak? 3

4

RAHIM Soalannya, apanya soalannya? 5

6

SST Soalan yang sama, saya sudah jelaskan tadi. Soalan yang sama. 7

8

ABR Yang Arif, I think it’s better he asks the question, Yang Arif, because 9

it’s quite difficult because, you know. 10

11

SST Yang Arif, I didn’t want to repeat the same question all over again. 12

13

YA Kalau (02:01:47 inaudible). 14

15

SST Alright, itu saya tanya sekali. Okay, jadi soalannya adakah Encik 16

Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak meminta daripada Encik 17


prosedur Syariah. 19

20

RAHIM Saya hendak lihat apa yang dalam attachment ini apa dia? 1529 21

attachmentnya apa. 22

23

SST Dia nampaknya ada satu Master SLA. 24

25

RAHIM Yalah, mana attachmentnya? 26

27

SST Kalau hendak tengok dia di, okay, kalau Encik Rahim hendak lihat, the 28

attachmentnya sama dengan mukasurat 1480 sehingga 1528. 29

30

RAHIM Okay, soalannya? 31

32

SST Soalannya, adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak 33

meminta daripada Encik Rahim komen-komen berkenaan dengan 34

keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah? 35

36



SST Tidak pasti. 1

2

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti from the email, ya. 3

4

SST Tidak pasti. Seterusnya dalam Ikatan yang sama juga, Ikatan B4 5

mukasurat, mukasurat 1531 dan 1532. Encik Rahim sudah sampai 6

sana? Soalan yang sama, Encik Rahim hendak saya ulang sekali? 7

8

RAHIM Tidak pasti. 9

10

SST Tidak pasti. Seterusnya dalam Ikatan yang sama, B4, mukasurat 11

1580. Yang ini juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik 12

Rahim? 13

14

RAHIM Ya. 15

16

SST Yang ini soalan, Encik Rahim hendak saya ulang? 17

18

RAHIM Bukan, ini tidak kena mengena dengan Syariah. 19

20

SST Tidak kena mengena dengan Syariah. Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim 21

kepada Ikatan B5, mukasurat 1653 sehingga 1659. Yang ini juga emel 22

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. Soalan yang sama. 23

24

RAHIM Sama ada saya setuju ataupun tidak setuju? 25

26

SST Ya. 27

28

ABR Yang Arif, I think after a while it’s quite confusing because I think I 29

request my learned friend to actually ask what question he wants so 30

that the witness understands. Because after a while, I think, he would, 31

you know, it’s difficult to follow after a while, Yang Arif. It’s only fair for 32

the witness. 33

34

35

36


SST Sure. Okay, soalannya, Encik Rahim, adakah Encik Rahim setuju 1

bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak meminta daripada Encik Rahim komen-2

komen berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur 3

Syariah? 4

5

RAHIM Tidak pasti. 6

7

SST Tidak pasti. Dalam Ikatan yang sama, B5, mukasurat 1783 sehingga 8

1803. Yang ini emel. Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik 9

Rahim disalinkan kepada Dr Narayanan. You want me to repeat the 10

question? Soalan, adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya 11


dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah? Setuju atau 13

tidak? 14

15

RAHIM Ini tidak melibatkan Syariah. 16

17

SST Tidak libatkan Syariah. 18

19

RAHIM Tetapi saya ingin merujuk kepada 1802. 20

21

SST Yang Arif, boleh saya teruskan daripada (02:09:26 inaudible)? 22

23

RAHIM Yang Arif, saya ingin merujuk yang key personnel itu. Nama saya itu 24

sudah tidak kelihatan di situ jadi. 25

26

YA Mukasurat? 27

28

RAHIM 1802. 29

30

SST Nama Encik Rahim tidak kelihatan, ya? 31

32

RAHIM Ya. 33

34

SST Okay, saya teruskan, ya. Ikatan yang sama, B5. B5 juga, Ikatan yang 35

sama, mukasurat 1854 sehingga 1858. Encik Rahim sudah sampai 36

sana? 37


RAHIM Ya. 1

2

SST Okay, ini adalah emel juga daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik 3

Rahim dan Encik Khairul Hamzah yang ini bertarikh 11.11.2007, 4

soalan yang sama. Encik Rahim perlu saya ulang? Encik Rahim? 5

6

RAHIM Ia tidak melibatkan Syariah. 7

8

SST Tidak libatkan Syariah. 9

10


12

SST 1854 sehingga 1858. Seterusnya Ikatan yang sama, Bundle B5, 13

mukasurat 1860 sehingga 1907. Encik Rahim sudah sampai sana? 14

15

RAHIM Okay, ya. 16

17

SST Ya. Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Encik 18

Khairul Hamzah jadi soalan yang sama. Encik Rahim hendak saya 19

ulang soalan? 20

21


23

SST Seterusnya dalam Ikatan B5 juga, mukasurat 1908 hingga 1926. 24

Encik Rahim sudah sampai sana? Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya 25

kepada Encik Rahim juga kepada Encik Khairul Hamzah dan Dr 26

Narayanan. Soalan yang sama. Encik Rahim hendak saya ulang 27

soalan? 28

29

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti saya menerima emel tersebut. 30

31

SST Tidak pasti terima emel. 32

33

Masa: 12:49 PM 34

[02:15:00] 35

36

37


YA Kita akan sambung (02:15:02 inaudible) 1

2

SST Much obliged, Yang Arif. 3

4

ABR What time, Yang Arif? 5

6

YA 2:15 pm. 7

8

ABR 2:15 pm. Because the prayer is a bit later nowadays, Yang Arif. 9

10

YA 2:30 pm. 11

12

ABR 2:30 pm, Yang Arif. 13

14

YA 2:30 pm. 15

16

SST 2:30 pm. 17

18

JRB Court bangun. 19

20

21

22

AKHIR 23

24

MASA : 12:50 PM 25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37


TARIKH : 5.02.2015 1

MASA : 2.26 PM 2

3

4

MULA 5

6

SST Dengan izin, Yang Arif. Encik Rahim, kita teruskan. 7

8

RAHIM Ya. 9

10

Pemeriksaan Balas (Cross-Examination) 11

Masa: 2:27PM 12

13

SST Rujuk kepada Ikatan B5, muka surat 1936 sehingga 1954. Ini juga 14

emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim, Khairil Hamzah 15

dan Dr Narayanan. Soalan yang sama, Encik Rahim perlu saya ulang 16

semula? 17

18

RAHIM Soalannya? 19

20

SST Soalannya, adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak 21

meminta daripada Encik Rahim komen-komen berkenaan dengan 22

keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah? 23

24

RAHIM Ya, setuju. 25

26

SST Dokumen seterusnya ikatan yang sama, B5, muka surat 1956. Soalan 27

yang sama. Ini emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. 28

29

RAHIM Ini emel dia resending to me. 30

31

SST Ya. Jadi soalan yang sama. 32

33

RAHIM Bukan, tadi saya dah jawab ini. 34

35

SST Belum lagi, yang ini dokumen seterusnya. 36

37


RAHIM Resending. 1

2

SST Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya tidak meminta 3

daripada Encik Rahim komen-komen berkenaan dengan keperluan 4

dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah. 5

6

RAHIM Saya setuju. 7

8

SST Seterusnya ikatan yang sama B5, muka surat 1957. Soalan yang 9

sama. 10

11

RAHIM Tidak ada Syariah isu. 12

13

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B5 juga, muka surat 1958. 14

15

RAHIM Ini tidak ada attachment. Ini yang satu 1958, mana attachment? Sama 16

dengan tadi? 17

18

SST Saya percaya ia sama dengan 1956. Encik Rahim nak rujuk, ia sama 19

dengan attachment dalam 1936. 20

21

RAHIM Jawapannya sama, sebab dia punya slide sama. 22

23

SST Sama? 24

25

RAHIM Saya tidak pasti yang dalam 1936 sama ataupun tidak. 26

27

SST Kalau Encik Rahim nak attachment, dia sama dengan 1936. 28

29

RAHIM Cuma di sini ini tidak dikepilkan attachment-nya. Kemungkinan 30

attachmentnya itu berlainan daripada 1936, jadi saya. 31

32

SST Jadi apa jawapan Encik Ramli? 33

34

RAHIM Macam mana saya nak menjawab soalan itu kalau you tanya sama 35

ada, ada. 36

37


SST Saya kata, saya cadang kepada Encik Rahim, kandungannya sama 1

dengan 1936. 2

3

RAHIM Ok, tidak ada, 4

5

SST Tiada isu Syariah, ya? Apa jawapan Encik Rahim sebenarnya? 6

7

RAHIM Kalau slidenya itu sama dengan 1936, jadi tidak ada isu-isu Syariah. 8

9

SST Ok. 10

11

RAHIM Kalau slide 1956 itu sama dengan 1936. 12

13

SST Ok, teruskan. Ikatan B5 muka surat 1959. Pun soalan yang sama. 14

15

RAHIM Attachment yang sama? 16

17

SST Ya, sama. Jawapan pun sama? 18

19

RAHIM Slide itu sama dengan 1958? 20

21

SST Ya. 22

23

RAHIM Jawapannya sama. 24

25

SST Sila rujuk kepada Ikatan B6, muka surat 2077. Emel daripada Encik 26

Udhaya kepada Dr Narayanan disalinkan kepada kamu dan Khairil 27

Hamzah, 2077. 28

29

RAHIM Ini tidak ada attachment. 30

31

SST Ya, attachment sama dengan muka surat 2026. Soalan yang sama. 32

33

RAHIM Sebab ada satu yang 2029 itu, ada di situ ‘Islamic credit card 34

services’. So saya belum cari di mana clause yang terbabit dengan 35

islamic credit card services, 2029. Dalam page 2063, di bawah itu 36


‘preparation and finalise product and services for meeting Syariah 1

compliance.’ Jadi soalannya? 2

3

SST Soalan saya ialah adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Encik Udhaya 4


dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah dalam emel di 6

2077. 7

8

RAHIM Saya tidak setuju. 9

10

SST Seterusnya Bundle B6 juga muka surat 2088 dan 2089. Emel 11

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Dr Narayanan, Khairil Hamzah dan 12

disalinkan kepada Encik Rahim. Soalan yang sama. 13

14

[00:15:00] 15

16

RAHIM Ini tidak melibatkan Syariah issue. 17

18

SST Seterusnya Ikatan yang sama, B6, muka surat 2154 hingga 2161. 19

Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Khairil 20

Hamzah. 21

22

RAHIM Tidak ada isu Syariah. 23

24

SST Seterusnya ikatan yang sama, B6, muka surat 2166 hingga 2167. 25

Emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. 26

27

RAHIM Ini yang sama emel tadi itu. Tidak ada Syariah issue. 28

29

SST Seterusnya ikatan yang sama, muka surat 2175 hingga 2180. Emel 30

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Khairil Hamzah dan Encik Rahim. 31

32

RAHIM Attachment-nya tidak ada. 33

34

35

36


SST Attachment pada muka surat 2162. Tak apa. Yang ini saya withdraw. 1

Yang Arif, I withdraw this reference to this, I apologise; 2175. 2

Seterusnya Ikatan B6 juga, muka surat 2181 sehingga 2182. Ini 3

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Khairil Hamzah. 4

5


7

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B6 muka surat 2183 hingga 2189. Emel daripada 8

Encik Udaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Khairil Hamzah. 9

10


12

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B6, muka surat 2226 hingga 2227. Juga emel 13

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Khairil Hamzah. 14

15

RAHIM Ya, tidak ada isu Syariah. 16

17

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B6, muka surat 2236 sehingga 2237. 18

Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim dan Khairil 19

Hamzah. 20

21

RAHIM Tidak ada Syariah issue. 22

23

SST Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Ikatan B7 muka surat 2492, 24

juga daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. Attachment dia, 25

Encik Rahim perlukan attachment dia? 26

27

RAHIM Tidak ada attachment. 28

29

SST Attachment-nya Encik Rahim boleh rujuk kepada Ikatan B3, muka 30

surat 839 sehingga 869. This is part of the email at page, sebahagian 31

daripada emel pada muka surat 838. 32

33

RAHIM Tidak ada, Yang Arif. 34

35

SST Jawapan sama seperti tadi? 36

37


RAHIM Kecuali surat itu sama dengan yang dirujuk itu. 1

2

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B7 muka surat 2525 hingga 2527. Emel 3

daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim. 4

5

RAHIM Tidak ada isu Syariah, Yang Arif. 6

7

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B7 muka surat 2530 dan 2531. Emel daripada 8

Encik Udhaya juga kepada Encik Rahim. 9

10

RAHIM Tidak ada isu-isu Syariah. 11

12

[00:30:00] 13

14

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B7 juga, muka surat 2598 sehingga 15

2650. Juga emel daripada Encik Udhaya kepada Encik Rahim, Khairil 16

Hamzah dan Dr Narayanan. Soalan yang sama. 17

18

RAHIM Ini saya tak setuju. 19

20

SST Encik Rahim, kita balik ke Ikatan B4 muka surat 1223. Attachment-nya 21

ada pada muka surat, dalam Ikatan B3 muka surat 1178. 22

23

RAHIM Soalannya di mana? Soalan yang ini? Yang 1223? 24

25

SST Ya, soalan yang sama. 26

27

RAHIM Attachment yang sama? 28

29

SST Attachment sama – pada 1178. 30

31


33

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B4 juga, muka surat 1224 hingga 1264. 34

35

RAHIM Saya tak setuju. 36

37


SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B4 juga muka surat 1265 hingga 1307. 1

2


4

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B4 juga muka surat 1308 hingga 1349. 5

6

RAHIM Tidak setuju. 7

8

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B4 juga, muka surat 1535. 9

10

RAHIM Sebab attachment ini tidak ada, Yang Arif. 11

12

SST Attachment ada pada muka surat 579 Ikatan B2, hingga 588, 13

attachment yang sama. 14

15

[00:45:00] 16

17

RAHIM Tidak ada issue kalau emel itu sama dengan yang terdahulu 18

lampirannya. 19

20

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B4 juga muka surat 1536 dan 1537. 21

22


24

SST Dokumen seterusnya, sila rujuk kepada Ikatan B5 muka surat 1708. 25

26


28

SST Dokumen seterusnya, boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Ikatan 29

B6 muka surat 2092. 30

31

RAHIM Tidak ada Syariah issue. 32

33

SST Dokumen seterusnya Ikatan B6 bermula dengan muka surat 2371 34

hingga 2431. Encik Rahim kena buka Ikatan B7. B6, starting 2371, it 35

runs until 2431, B7, sambung. 36

37



2

SST Sila rujuk semula kepada Ikatan B4 muka surat 1409 hingga 1411. 3

Attachment-nya sama dengan emel pada muka surat 1353. The email 4

prior to it, sehingga 1408. Ini soalan berlainan. Yang ini emel daripada 5

Encik Udhaya kepada Dr Narayanan, disalinkan kepada Encik Rahim. 6

Encik Udhaya melanjutkan emel daripada Phang Eng Boon daripada 7

Tetuan Raja, Darryl & Loh kepada Defendan Kedua dan juga Encik 8

Udhaya. Yang ini berkenaan dengan perubahan kepada Master SLA 9

antara Bank Rakyat dengan Defendan Kedua. Soalan saya ialah 10

adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa tujuan Encik Udhaya 11

menyalinkan emel ini kepada Encik Rahim adalah untuk update Encik 12

Rahim tentang perbincangan di Tetuan Raja Darryl & Loh berkenaan 13

dengan pindaan kepada Master SLA. Encik Rahim perlukan saya 14

ulang semula soalan? 15

16

RAHIM Ya. 17

18

SST Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa tujuan Encik Udhaya 19

menyalinkan emel ini kepada Encik Rahim adalah untuk update Encik 20

Rahim tentang perbincangan di Tetuan Raja Darryl & Loh berkenaan 21

dengan pindaan kepada Master SLA. 22

23

RAHIM “For you information” apa maksudnya? Untuk makluman sahaja. 24

25

SST Boleh rujuk kepada Ikatan B3, bermula dengan muka surat 1177 dan 26

dia akan bersambung di Ikatan B4 muka surat 1210. 27

28

RAHIM Soalannya? 29

30

SST Soalannya, ini emel daripada Dr Narayanan kepada Encik Udhaya 31

disalinkan kepada Encik Rahim – dokumen Master Service Level 32

Agreement antara Bank Rakyat dan Defendan Kedua disertakan. 33

Adakah Encik Rahim menulis sebarang emel atau surat kepada Dr 34

Narayanan menanya beliau mengapa Encik Rahim disalinkan dengan 35

emel ini? 36

37


RAHIM Tidak. 1

2

SST Seterusnya Ikatan B4 muka surat 1583 hingga 1624. 1624 dalam 3

Ikatan B5. Emel daripada Dr Narayanan kepada Encik Udhaya 4

disalinkan kepada Encik Rahim. Soalan saya: adakah Encik Rahim 5

setuju bahawa Dr Narayanan tidak meminta daripada Encik Rahim 6

komen-komen berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur 7

Syariah? Berbeza sekarang soalan. 8

9

RAHIM Lagi sekali? 10

11

SST Adakah Enck Rahim setuju bahawa Dr Narayanan tidak meminta 12


dan pematuhan prosedur Syariah? 14

15

[01:00:00] 16

17

RAHIM Saya tidak setuju, Yang Arif. 18

19

YA Mahkamah ditangguh sebentar. 20

21


23

24

25

AKHIR 26

27

MASA : 3.27 PM 28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37


TARIKH : 05.02.2015 1

MASA : 3:39 PM 2

3

MULA 4

5

SST Dengan izin, Yang Arif. 6

7

Pemeriksaan Balas (Cross-Examination) –Cont’d 8

Masa: 3:39 PM 9

10

SST Encik Rahim, sekarang saya akan merujuk Encik Rahim kepada 11

beberapa emel daripada Encik Razak daripada pihak Defendan 12

Kedua. Soalan yang saya tanya akan sama iaitu Encik Rahim dengar 13

dahulu. Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa dalam emel–emel ini 14

Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua tidak meminta daripada Encik 15


prosedur Syariah. Itu soalannya. 17

18

RAHIM Tidak meminta? 19

20

SST Ya, tidak meminta. Ok? Jadi saya akan rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 21

emel-emel tersebut sekarang. Encik Rahim faham? Maksudnya, the 22

same question for the following e-mails. Encik Rahim faham? Alright. 23

Emel yang pertama, Ikatan-B4. Muka surat 1211 hingga 1212. Ini 24

emel yang pertama. 25

26

RAHIM Tidak ada Syariah. 27

28

SST Dokumen yang kedua, Ikatan-B5. Muka surat 1660 hingga 1706. 29

30

RAHIM 1? 31

32

SST` 6-6-0 hingga 1706. Maaf, Ikatan-B5. 33

34

RAHIM Soalannya? 35

36


SST Soalan yang sama juga. Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa dalam 1

emel ini Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua tidak meminta 2


dan pemakluman prosedur Syariah. 4

5


7

SST Dokumen seterusnya. 8

9

YA Maknanya ada minta? 10

11

RAHIM Ya, benar. 12

13

SST Dokumen seterusnya, Ikatan-B6. Muka surat 2246 hingga 2304. 14

15

RAHIM 23? 16

17

SST 2246 sehingga 2304. 18

19

RAHIM 2246? 20

21


23

RAHIM Setuju. 24

25

SST Dokumen seterusnya. Ikatan-B6 juga. Muka surat 2-3-1. 26

27

YA Apa jawapan kamu? 28

29

RAHIM Saya setuju. 30

31

SST Muka surat 2313 hingga 2370. Ikatan-B6. 32

33


35

SST Dokumen seterusnya. Ikatan-B4, muka surat 1431. 36

37


RAHIM B 4? 1

2

SST B 4. 1431 hingga 1476. 3

4


6

SST Tidak setuju. Dokumen seterusnya. Ikatan-B4, muka surat 1479 7

hingga 1528. 8

9

RAHIM 1479 sehingga? 10

11


13


15

SST Dokumen yang seterusnya. Ikatan B4 juga. Muka surat 1538 hingga 16

1579. 17

18


20

SST Sila rujuk kepada Ikatan-B3. Muka surat 1026 hingga 1062. 21

22

RAHIM 1-0? 23

24

SST 2-6. Ini adalah emel daripada Encik Rahim kepada Encik Udaya 25

bertarikh 02.04.2007. Encik Rahim telah melampirkan dokumen 26

Master Service Level Agreement antara Bank Rakyat dan Defendan 27

Kedua dan sini Encik Rahim telah menulis dalam emel “To be 28

discussed by tomorrow and finalized the comments and feedbacks to 29

Razak by end of week. Thanks.” Soalan saya, daripada siapa Encik 30

Rahim memperolehi dokumen ini? 31

32

RAHIM Daripada Encik Razak. 33

34

35

36


SST Daripada Encik Razak. Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Ikatan-1

B 4. Muka surat 1533 hingga 1534. Yang ini emel daripada Encik 2

Rahim kepada Encik Udaya. Yang ini dokumen pertama. Saya akan 3

rujuk Encik Rahim kepada beberapa dokumen. Lepas tu saya tanya 4

soalan. Yang ini dokumen pertama. Dokumen kedua, Ikatan-B 4 juga, 5

muka surat 1581. Encik Rahim dah sampai sana? Yang ini juga emel 6

daripada Encik Rahim kepada Encik Udaya. Dan satu lagi dokumen. 7

Tak apa, dua-dua dokumen ini dah cukup. Jadi soalan saya, soalan 8

saya ialah adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa dalam kedua-dua emel 9

ini, dalam kedua-dua emel ini, Encik Rahim tidak memberikan komen-10

komen berkenaan dengan keperluan dan pematuhan prosedur 11

Syariah kepada Encik Udaya. 12

13

[00:15:00] 14

15


17

SST Tidak setuju. Encik Rahim tahu siapakah pemilik emel Silver Arrow? 18

19

RAHIM Tak tahu. 20

21

SST Tak tahu? Silvermate? Pun tak tahu. Boleh saya confirm Encik Rahim 22

tak tahu siapa pemilik emel Silvermate? Tak tahu? 23

24

ABR Silvermate? 25

26

RAHIM Silvermate. 27

28

ABR How do you spell it? 29

30

SST He said he doesn’t know. 31

32

ABR No, I understand. Silver? 33

34

SST Silvermate. S-I-L-V-E-R-M-A-T-E. 35

36

37


RAHIM Boleh rujuk emel yang – ada emel yang berkaitan? 1

2

SST Nanti. Saya tanya dulu. Silver arrow? 3

4

RAHIM Tak pasti. 5

6

SST Tak pasti. Saya akan move on kepada isu yang lain. Now, adakah 7

Encik Rahim setuju bahawa berkenaan dengan Bank Islam Card 8

Centre atau BICC, Bank Islam sentiasa berurusan dengan Plaintif dan 9

bukannya dengan Encik Udaya atau Dr Narayanan dalam kapasiti 10

peribadi mereka. 11

12

RAHIM Setuju. 13

14

SST Setuju? Dan adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa berkenaan dengan 15

perkhidmatan yang telah diberikan oleh Plaintif kepada Bank Islam, 16

Bank Islam telah membayar Plaintif dan bukannya kepada Encik 17

Udaya atau Dr Narayanan dalam kapasiti peribadi mereka. 18

19

RAHIM Soalannya? 20

21

SST Itu soalannya. 22

23

RAHIM Setuju atau? 24

25

SST Setuju atau tidak. Apa jawapan Encik Rahim? 26

27

RAHIM Setuju. 28

29

SST Setuju. I’m going to a new issue. 30

31

YA Again? 32

33

SST I’m going to a new issue. New issue. Now, Encik Rahim kenal tak 34

Encik Md Hidzir Bin Adam? 35

36

37


RAHIM Kenal. 1

2

SST Minta maaf? 3

4

RAHIM Kenal. 5

6

SST Kenal. Dan Encik Rahim kenal tak syarikat IICS Sdn. Bhd? 7

8

RAHIM II? 9

10

SST CS. 11

12

RAHIM Ya, kenal. 13

14

SST Apa jawapan? 15

16

RAHIM Kenal. 17

18

SST Kenal. Encik Rahim tahu tak tahun bila IICS Sdn. Bhd. ditubuhkan? 19

20

RAHIM Saya kurang pasti. 21

22

SST Kurang pasti. Mungkin dalam tahun 2007? 23

24

RAHIM Ya, mungkin. 25

26

SST Ya. Encik Rahim setuju tak bahawa Encik Md Hidzir Bin Adam adalah 27

salah seorang daripada Pengarah syarikat IICS Sdn. Bhd.? 28

29

RAHIM Ya. 30

31

SST Dan adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa Pengarah IICS Sdn. Bhd. 32

yang satu lagi adalah Puan Liana Sari Binti Hafizar? 33

34

RAHIM Ya. 35

36

37


SST Minta maaf? 1

2

RAHIM Ya. 3

4

SST Ya. Dan setuju tak bahawa pada tahun 2007, Encik Rahim masih 5

berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam? 6

7

RAHIM Ya. 8

9

SST Saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Md Hidzir Bin 10

Adam telah dilantik sebagai Pengarah IICS Sdn. Bhd. dengan tujuan 11

untuk bertindak sebagai proxy Encik Rahim, kerana pada ketika itu 12

Encik Rahim masih berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam. 13

Setuju atau tidak? 14

15


17

SST Tidak setuju. Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Ikatan – B10. 18

Muka surat 3959. 19

20

RAHIM 3? 21

22

SST 3959 hingga muka surat 3963. 23

24

RAHIM 39? 25

26

SST 59. Encik Rahim dah sampai sana? Ini adalah maklumat korporat 27

syarikat ARS Associates Sdn. Bhd. Encik Rahim kenal syarikat ini? 28

29

RAHIM Kenal. 30

31

SST Dalam Soalan Jawapan pertama Encik Rahim, Encik Rahim kata 32

Encik Rahim adalah penasihat kanan di ARS Associates. Masih 33

betul? 34

35

RAHIM Ya, betul. 36

37


SST Dan sila lihat muka surat 3961 Bundel yang sama, B-10. 3961. Kita 1

lihat ada dua orang Pengarah, Sharidah Binti Yusuf dan Md Hidzir Bin 2

Adam. 3

4

RAHIM Ya. 5

6

SST Now, Encik Rahim kenal Sharidah Binti Yusuf/ 7

8

RAHIM Kenal. 9

10

SST Adakah, yang ini cuma tekaan sahaja, adakah Puan Sharidah Binti 11

Yusuf adalah isteri Encik Rahim? 12

13

RAHIM Ya, betul. 14

15

SST Encik Rahim setuju tak bahawa kalau ikut maklumat korporat ini, ARS 16

Associates Sdn. Bhd. juga telah ditubuhkan dalam tahun 2007? 17

18

RAHIM Betul. 19

20

SST Dan saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim sekali lagi bahawa Encik 21

Md Hidzir Bin Adam juga dilantik sebagai salah seorang daripada 22

Pengarah ARS Associates dengan tujuan untuk bertindak sebagai 23

proxy Encik Rahim kerana Encik Rahim pada ketika itu masih 24

berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam. Setuju atau tidak? 25

26


28

SST Saya rujuk Encik Rahim pada Ikatan – B 10 juga. Boleh lihat muka 29

surat 3952 dan 3953? 30

31

RAHIM 39? 32

33

SST 52 dan 3953. Encik Rahim dah sampai sana? Encik Rahim tahu tak 34

bahawa pada ketika itu, Encik Md Hidzir Bin Adam dan Liana Sari 35

Binti Hafizar juga adalah pengarah-pengarah IICSO? Encik Rahim 36

tahu tak? 37


RAHIM Tahu. 1

2

SST Saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim sekali lagi bahawa dalam 3

syarikat IICSO, Encik Md Hidzir Bin Adam juga sebenarnya bertindak 4

sebagai proxy untuk menjaga kepentingan Encik Rahim kerana Encik 5

Rahim pada ketika itu masih bertugas secara rasmi dengan Bank 6

Islam? Bersetuju atau tidak. 7

8


10

SST Boleh Encik Rahim sahkan bahawa emel [email protected] 11

adalah emel isteri Encik Rahim? 12

13

RAHIM Di mana tu? Emel yang mana? 14

15

SST Ok, saya rujuk kepada Encik Rahim. Kita ambil Bundle-B5 muka surat, 16

sebagai contoh, muka surat 1959. 17

18

RAHIM 1? 19

20

SST 9-5-9. Encik Rahim nampak emel itu [email protected]? 21

22

[00:30:00] 23

24

RAHIM Ya, ini yang saya cakap yang tadi itu. Bila streamyx itu, kadang-25

kadang dia tak sudah bila dah full, fail dalam tu, jadi kebanyakan 26

daripada fail itu tidak boleh masuk. Jadi, saya gunakan, apa tu, emel 27

isteri saya dalam hal ini. 28

29

SST Iaitu [email protected]? 30

31

RAHIM Ya. Personal emel beliau. 32

33

SST Tapi Encik Rahim gunakan lah? 34

35

RAHIM Tak, itu pun dalam keadaan yang tertentu sahaja saya gunakan. 36

Sebab ini emel yang, apa tu, kepunyaan isteri saya. 37


SST Kita pergi ke isu yang baru. Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 1

Bundle B5, sekali lagi. Muka surat 1628. 2

3

RAHIM 1-6? 4

5

SST 2-8 hingga 1649. 1628 until 1649. Encik Rahim dah sampai sana? 6

7

RAHIM Ya. 8

9

SST Ini emel 07.06.2007 daripada Encik Udaya kepada Encik Rahim dan 10

Dr Narayanan. Encik Udaya telah melampirkan presentation slide 11

untuk Indonesia. Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa presentation 12

slide ini telah disediakan oleh Encik Udaya? 13

14

RAHIM Soalannya? 15

16

SST Itu soalannya. Saya ulang semula. 17

18

RAHIM Cuma saya kurang pasti sebab emel ni pada Udaya. Jadi saya tak 19

tahu sama ada di buat oleh Encik Udaya ataupun Dr Narayanan. I’m 20

not sure. 21

22

SST Dan pada tarikh ini, 07.06.2007, boleh Encik Rahim sahkan bahawa 23

Encik Rahim masih berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam? 24

25

RAHIM Ya. 26

27

SST Now, boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Soalan Jawapan No.24 28

Encik Rahim. Yang ni pada muka surat 24. Muka surat terakhir. 29

Perenggan kedua dalam jawapan Encik Rahim. Saya baca untuk 30

Encik Rahim. Perenggan dua Encik Rahim kata “Manakala untuk 31

presentasi di Indonesia, saya telah diminta untuk membantu pihak 32

Uday dan Defendan Kedua dalam perbincangan dengan bank-bank di 33

sana untuk berkongsi pendapat dan pengalaman sekiranya timbul isu-34

isu atau hal-hal yang berkaitan Syariah dan operasi kad kredit Islam”. 35

Now, sebenarnya siapa yang minta bantuan Encik Rahim? 36

37


RAHIM Siapa diminta bantuan? 1

2

SST Ya. Siapa yang minta bantuan? 3

4

RAHIM Kedua-duanya lah. Encik Uday dan Defendan Kedua. 5

6

SST Kedua-dua Uday dan Defendan Kedua. Adakah terdapat sebarang 7

emel atau surat tu daripada Encik Udaya kepada Encik Rahim dalam 8

Ikatan-Ikatan di hadapan Encik Rahim yang meminta bantuan Encik 9

Rahim untuk Indonesia? 10

11

RAHIM Tidak ada. 12

13

SST Adakah Encik Rahim terlibat dalam presentasi kepada bank-bank di 14

Indonesia? 15

16

RAHIM Saya tidak terlibat dalam presentasi; cuma saya terlibat dalam 17

perbincangan semasa presentasi tersebut diadakan. 18

19

SST Now, boleh saya tanya Encik Rahim masih ingat berapa hari Encik 20

Rahim berada di Indonesia untuk tujuan ini? 21

22

RAHIM Saya ingat dalam three days. 23

24

SST Maaf? 25

26

RAHIM Tiga hari. 27

28

SST Tiga hari? 29

30

RAHIM Hari pertama, hari kedua tu kita ada itu. Tiga hari. 31

32

SST Saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim telah 33

mengambil bahagian dalam presentasi atau perbincangan di 34

Indonesia ini kerana kamu telah diminta oleh Defendan Kedua. Setuju 35

atau tidak? 36

37



2

SST Tidak setuju. Now, isu yang baru. Adakah ia keterangan atau adakah 3

ia masih keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim mengetahui 4

tentang Projek Bank Rakyat semasa Encik Rahim masih berkhidmat 5

secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam? 6

7

RAHIM Saya tak faham soalan. 8

9

SST Tak faham? Ok. Boleh saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Soalan 10

Jawapan No. 9, muka surat 7. 11

12

RAHIM Muka surat? 13

14

SST Muka surat 7. Soalan jawapan Encik Rahim. Encik Rahim dah sampai 15

sana? Encik Rahim baca dulu sebelum saya tanya soalan tu. Jadi, 16

soalan saya. Adakah ia keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim 17

hanya mengetahui tentang Projek Bank Rakyat ini semasa Encik 18

Rahim masih berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam? 19

20

RAHIM Ya, betul. 21

22

SST Dan adakah Encik Rahim masih ingat lebih kurang bila Bank Rakyat 23

menghubungi Bank Islam tentang cadangan kerjasama dengan Bank 24

Islam ini untuk projek tersebut? 25

26

RAHIM Ini kalau tak silap saya lah jadi bukannya tepat, secara tepat, jadi 27

sebelum perbincangan ataupun perjumpaan saya dengan, apa tu, 28

pihak Uday dan Defendan Kedua. Saya agak anggarannya dalam 29

bulan Jun, mid-2006, pertengahan 2006. 30

31

SST Pertengahan Jun. 32

33

RAHIM Mei atau Jun 2006, sebelum itu. 34

35

36


SST Mei atau Jun 2006. I see. Dan adakah Encik Rahim masih ingat lebih 1

kurang bila Bank Islam meminta Encik Rahim mewakili Bank Islam 2

dalam perbincangan-perbincangannya dengan Bank Rakyat tentang 3

projek ini? 4

5

RAHIM Semasa tu lah, Mei –Jun tu. 6

7

SST Semasa itu juga. Now, boleh saya merujuk kepada Soalan Jawapan 8

No. 9 sekali lagi. Soalan Jawapan 9 Encik Rahim, perenggan terakhir 9

pada muka surat 8. Pada muka surat 8, perenggan yang di atas 10

sekali. Encik Rahim nampak? Saya baca. Encik Rahim kata, “Pada 11

masa yang sama, MBf juga telah mencadangkan satu inisiatif yang 12

sama kepada Bank Rakyat.” Now, bagaimana Encik Rahim tahu 13

tentang perkara ini? 14

15

RAHIM Semasa perjumpaan saya dengan Bank Rakyat. 16

17

SST Jadi yang ini kalau ikut keterangan Encik Rahim tadi sekitar Mei atau 18

Jun 2006? 19

20

RAHIM Pada, saya berjumpa itu pada peringkat permulaan, Yang Arif, ialah 21

untuk memberitahu mereka mengenai operasi kad kredit Bank Islam 22

pada permulaannya. Selepas itu baru saya diberitahu bahawa MBf 23

pun ada memberi. 24

25

SST Selepas Mei atau Jun 2006? 26

27

RAHIM Tapi tarikh yang sebelum tu cuma dia panggil, apa tu, untuk Bank 28

Islam tu memberi penerangan mengenai, apa itu, kad kredit 29

processing. 30

31

SST Saya katakan dalam tempoh selepas Mei–Jun tapi sebelum 32

perjumpaan pertama dengan Plaintif dan. 33

34

RAHIM Selepas perjumpaan pertama dengan Plaintif. 35

36

37


SST Selepas perjumpaan. 1

2

RAHIM Selepas perjumpaan pertama dengan Bank Rakyat. Sorry. 3

4

SST Ok, jadi sebelum perjumpaan pertama dengan Udaya, Dr Narayanan 5

dan Encik Razak di Cyberlodge, Cyberjaya? Dalam tempoh tu lah 6

sebelum tu lah? Maksudnya, selepas Mei atau Jun, tapi sebelum 7

21.09.2006? Setuju tak? 8

9

RAHIM Setuju. 10

11

SST Dalam tempoh itu lah. Encik Rahim kata Encik Rahim telah diberitahu 12

oleh Bank Rakyat? 13

14

RAHIM Ya. Mereka beritahu tapi bukan secara detail cuma beritahu ok, MBf 15

pun ada masuk proposal. Itu saja. 16

17

SST Saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Soalan Jawapan No.10. Soalan 18

Jawapan 10, muka surat 8. Encik Rahim nak baca dulu? Alright, now 19

agak-agak bila Bank Islam membuat keputusan untuk tidak 20

meneruskan kerjasama ini dengan Bank Rakyat? 21

22

[00:45:00] 23

24

RAHIM Saya agak selepas perjumpaan, apa tu, dengan Bank Rakyat lah baru 25

saya boleh buat proposal dan saya hantar kepada pihak pengurusan 26

setelah saya berjumpa dengan Bank Rakyat dalam bulan Mei –Jun tu. 27

28

SST Dan adakah ia, maaf, adakah Bank Islam membuat keputusan untuk 29

tidak meneruskan kerjasama ini dengan Bank Rakyat atas nasihat 30

Encik Rahim? 31

32

RAHIM Nasihat saya ialah untuk teruskan tapi pihak pengurusan dan pihak, 33

apa tu, mereka berpendapat yang berlainan. Jadi, saya perlu atur 34

kepada keputusan. 35

36

37


SST Jadi pihak atasan Bank Islam tak nak teruskanlah? 1

2

RAHIM Sebab bagi mereka ialah sebab dua-duanya itu, Yang Arif, bank di 3

mana yang satu Bank Rakyat, satu Bank Islam. Memandangkan Bank 4

Rakyat dia nak buat co-branding, disebabkan oleh rahsia tu jadi pihak. 5

6

SST Ok, saya teruskan dengan soalan yang lain. Saya rujuk Encik Rahim 7

kepada Ikatan-B1. Secara khusus, saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 8

muka surat 350 hingga 352. 354. Lepas tu 355 hingga 356. 350 to 9

352, 354, 355, 356. 10

11

RAHIM 350? 12

13

SST Starting with 350, 351, 352, 354, 355, 356. Yang ni ditunjukkan 14

perbandingan antara cadangan MBf dan Defendan Kedua. Now, 15

soalan saya. Encik Rahim, soalan saya. Adakah Encik Rahim sedar 16

bahawa perbandingan ini telah disediakan oleh pihak Plaintif? 17

18

RAHIM Yang Arif, kalau lihat pada emel tu, emel ini diberi pada Udaya kepada 19

Encik Razak dan Narayanan bukan kepada saya. 20

21

SST Jadi Encik Rahim tidak tahu lah. Tak tahu? Saya cadangkan kepada 22

Encik Rahim bahawa template untuk membuat perbandingan ini telah 23

diberikan kepada Encik Rahim oleh seorang yang bernama Encik 24

Baharuddin daripada Bank Rakyat dan seterusnya Encik Rahim yang 25

berikannya kepada Encik Udaya. Encik Rahim setuju? 26

27

RAHIM Soalannya? 28

29

SST Soalannya, saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa template 30

untuk membuat perbandingan ini telah diberikan oleh Encik Rahim 31

oleh Encik Baharuddin daripada Bank Rakyat dan selepas itu Encik 32

Rahim telah memberikannya kepada Encik Udaya. Setuju atau tidak? 33

34

RAHIM Pertama, saya tak setuju, Yang Arif. Yang kedua tu, tidak ada nama 35

Encik Baharuddin from Bank Rakyat. 36

37


SST Saya juga cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim yang 1

meminta supaya perbandingan antara cadangan Defendan Kedua 2

dan MBf disediakan oleh pihak Plaintif. Setuju atau tidak? 3

4


6

SST Saya juga cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa alasan Encik 7

Rahim meminta perbandingan antara cadangan Defendan Kedua dan 8

MBf disediakan adalah untuk membolehkan Defendan Kedua 9

meyakinkan Bank Rakyat untuk melantik Defendan Kedua untuk 10

projek Bank Rakyat ini. Setuju atau tidak? 11

12


14

SST Saya rujuk Encik. Isu seterusnya. Saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 15

Soalan Jawapan No.12 khususnya pada muka surat 10, perenggan 16

yang di atas sekali. Saya baca. Ok, “Walau bagaimanapun saya telah 17

difahamkan bahawa Bank Rakyat hampir memilih MBf sebagai satu 18

kontraktor bagi projek penyumberluaran tersebut”. 19

20

RAHIM Sorry, apa tu? Soalan? 21

22

SST Saya belum tanya lagi. Now, di sini kamu, Encik Rahim telah 23

memberikan keterangan bahawa Encik Rahim tahu bahawa Bank 24

Rakyat telah hampir untuk melantik MBf untuk projek Bank Rakyat ini. 25

Now, adakah Encik Rahim masih mengekalkan keterangan ini? 26

27

RAHIM Masih. 28

29

SST Mengapa Encik Rahim tidak membiarkan sahaja Bank Rakyat 30

menganugerahkan Projek Bank Rakyat tersebut kepada MBf? 31

32

RAHIM Itu keputusan bank bukan keputusan saya. 33

34

35

36


SST Alright. Keputusan bank. Kalau begitu, mengapa Encik Rahim perlu 1

campur tangan atau menjadi seorang busybody dengan 2

memperkenalkan Encik Udaya dan Dr Narayanan daripada Plaintif 3

kepada Defendan Kedua dengan memberikan peluang kepada 4

mereka untuk merebut peluang ini daripada MBf? 5

6

RAHIM Saya bukan busybody, Yang Arif. Mereka yang merebut peluang 7

tersebut. Defendan Kedua dan pihak Uday dan Narayanan. Mereka 8

yang tahu tengok peluang tu bagus bagi mereka dan mereka yang, 9

apa tu, ingin menyertai peluang tersebut. 10

11

SST Encik Rahim, soalan saya. Sekiranya projek Bank Rakyat ini 12

dianugerahkan kepada MBf, adakah Encik Rahim akan mempunyai 13

apa-apa financial gain daripada keputusan tersebut? 14

15

RAHIM Yang Arif, apa tu, segala keputusan sama ada pihak bank tu hendak 16

memberi kepada MBf ataupun hendak memberi kepada Defendan 17

Kedua, terpulang kepada bank bukannya saya. 18

19

SST Encik Rahim, soalan saya ialah sekiranya projek Bank Rakyat 20

dianugerahkan kepada MBf, adakah Encik Rahim akan memperolehi 21

apa-apa financial gain daripada keputusan tersebut? 22

23

RAHIM Saya agak keliru dengan soalan pihak lawyer. 24

25

SST Sekiranya Bank Rakyat menganugerahkan atau memberikan projek 26

Bank Rakyat ini kepada MBf, adakah Encik Rahim akan memperolehi 27

sebarang financial gain daripada keputusan tersebut? Ada ke tak 28

ada? 29

30

RAHIM Yang Arif, keputusan sama ada pihak bank nak memberi kepada MBf 31

ataupun keputusan hendak memberi kepada Defendan tidak 32

mendatangkan benefit kepada saya. 33

34

YA Ya atau tidak? 35

36

37


RAHIM Tidak, Yang Arif. 1

2

SST Dan sekiranya Projek Bank Rakyat ini diberikan oleh Bank Rakyat 3

kepada Defendan Kedua, adakah Encik Rahim akan memperolehi 4

apa-apa financial gain daripada keputusan tersebut? Ya atau tidak. 5

6

RAHIM Tidak. 7

8

SST Dan sekiranya projek Bank Rakyat ini diberikan kepada suatu entity 9

usaha sama antara Defendan Kedua dan Plaintif adakah Encik Rahim 10

akan mempunyai apa-apa financial gain daripada keputusan tersebut? 11

Ya atau tidak. 12

13

RAHIM Soalannya sekali lagi. 14

15

SST Sekiranya projek Bank Rakyat diberikan oleh Bank Rakyat suatu 16

entity usaha sama antara Defendan Kedua dan Plaintif adakah Encik 17

Rahim akan memperolehi sebarang financial gain daripada keputusan 18

tersebut? 19

20

RAHIM Tidak. 21

22

SST Saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada Soalan Jawapan No. 14. Encik 23

Rahim nak baca dulu jawapan Encik Rahim. Dah baca? Ok. Now, di 24

sini Encik Rahim kata Encik Rahim ada hadir untuk perbincangan–25

perbincangan memberi nasihat Syariah dan lain-lain lah. Jadi soalan 26

saya. Memandangkan Encik Rahim tadi telah mengatakan bahawa 27

Encik Rahim tidak mempunyai apa-apa financial gain berkenaan 28

dengan sebarang keputusan Bank Rakyat untuk projek Bank Rakyat 29

ini, adakah Encik Rahim bersetuju bahawa Encik Rahim sepatutnya 30

tidak perlu membazir masa dengan memperkenalkan Defendan 31

Kedua kepada Plaintif menghadiri perbincangan–perbincangan yang 32

dihadiri oleh Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua dan Encik Udaya 33

serta Dr Narayanan daripada Plaintif memberikan khidmat nasihat 34

percuma seperti mana yang di dakwa oleh Encik Rahim. Setuju tak? 35

36

37



2

SST Saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim 3

sememangnya mempunyai kepentingan kewangan dalam Projek 4

Bank Rakyat ini kerana syarikat IICS di mana proxy kamu, Encik 5

Hidzir Bin Adam, sebagai salah seorang pengarahnya sepatutnya 6

memberikan perkhidmatan consultancy kepada IICSO, syarikat yang 7

dirancangkan untuk menguruskan operasi Projek Bank Rakyat. 8

9


11

SST Tidak setuju. Saya juga cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa 12

Encik Rahim sememangnya mempunyai kepentingan kewangan 13

dalam projek Bank Rakyat ini kerana syarikat IICSO di mana proxy 14

Encik Rahim, Encik Hidzir Bin Adam, adalah syarikat yang 15

dirancangkan untuk menguruskan operasi Projek Bank Rakyat ini. 16

Setuju atau tidak? 17

18


20

SST Saya juga cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa Encik Rahim 21

sememangnya mempunyai kepentingan kewangan dalam projek Bank 22

Rakyat ini kerana sekiranya Encik Rahim berjaya membantu 23

Defendan Kedua untuk memperolehi Projek Bank Rakyat ini, ia akan 24

membantu Encik Rahim untuk memasuki atau to join Kumpulan 25

Silverlake. Setuju atau tidak? 26

27

[01:00:00] 28

29


31

SST Saya juga cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa berkenaan 32

dengan premis di Wisma Bandar di mana Bank Rakyat Card Centre 33

akan di tempatkan dan akan diuruskan oleh Defendan Kedua dengan 34

kerjasama Plaintif melalui IICSO, Encik Rahim sepatutnya mempunyai 35

bilik Encik Rahim di sana juga. Setuju atau tidak. 36

37



2

SST Tidak setuju. Saya teruskan kepada isu yang lain. Now, kamu setuju 3

tak bahawa pada. sorry, maaf. Saya rujuk Encik Rahim kepada 4

Soalan Jawapan No. 13 dan 16. 5

6

YA Banyaklah isu? 7

8

SST I have another nine pages more, Yang Arif. I have all together 20 9

pages of questions. I have another nine pages. Encik Rahim nak baca 10

dulu Soalan Jawapan 13 dan 16. 11

12

RAHIM 13 dan 16. 13

14

SST 13 dan 16. Now, boleh Encik Rahim sahkan bahawa pada semua 15

waktu yang material, Encik Rahim bekerja secara rasmi dengan Bank 16

Islam? 17

18

RAHIM Ya, sehingga bulan Februari 2008. 19

20

SST Dan Encik Rahim setuju tak bahawa semasa Encik Rahim masih 21

berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam, Encik Rahim telah pun 22

mengenali Encik Udaya dan Dr Narayanan? 23

24

RAHIM Ya. 25

26

SST Encik Rahim setuju tak bahawa semasa Encik Rahim masih 27

berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam, Encik Rahim 28

mempunyai pengetahuan tentang kepakaran kedua-dua Encik Udaya 29

dan Dr Narayanan. 30

31

RAHIM Boleh apa tu? Kepakaran tu? Kepakaran dari segi apa? Kepakaran tu 32

bidang yang besar, Yang Arif. 33

34

SST Boleh Encik Rahim terangkan bagaimana Encik Rahim mengenali 35

Encik Udaya? 36

37


RAHIM Nak terangkan kepakaran ataupun? 1

2

SST Terangkan bagaimana Encik Rahim mengenali Encik Udaya? 3

4

RAHIM Saya mengenali mereka, Yang Arif, ketika di Bank Islam. Mereka 5

telah membantu pihak Bank Islam dari segi pembentukan User 6

Acceptance Test Plan itu dan The Operation Manual Policy dan 7

Guideline untuk keseluruhan operasi kad kredit di Bank Islam. 8

9

SST Dan adakah Encik Rahim tahu bahawa Encik Udaya pernah. Maaf, 10

biar saya rujuk kepada muka surat yang berkenaan. Adakah Encik 11

Rahim tahu bahawa Encik Udaya, ok, mempunyai lebih daripada 18 12

tahun pengalaman dalam segi, saya baca dalam Bahasa Inggeris. 13

“operations card marketing, merchant marketing and project 14

management systems testing and implementation of credit card 15

operations”. Encik Rahim tahu tak? 16

17

RAHIM Saya tahu semasa mereka membantu saya dalam kad kredit di Bank 18

Islam, Yang Arif. Selebih itu saya tak tahu. 19

20

SST Adakah Encik Rahim juga tahu bahawa Encik Udaya pernah, saya 21

perlu baca dalam Bahasa Inggeris. “That Mr Udaya has consulted for 22

Visa International on all aspects of marketing, consumer research, 23

advertising, end promotions and product implementation and that he 24

has also worked for Maybank and Multi-Purpose Bank Credit Card 25

Operations”. Encik Rahim tahu tak? 26

27

RAHIM Tak tahu. 28

29

SST Adakah Encik Rahim tahu tak bahawa Dr Narayanan, experience dia. 30

Saya baca dalam Bahasa Inggeris. “Dr Narayanan’s 30 years of 31

consulting experience have involved work with organizations such as 32

AT&T USA, Maybank Malaysia, Bank Islam Malaysia, Mellon Bank 33

USA, Union Bank Switzerland USA and Crocker National Bank USA”. 34

Tahu tak? 35

36

37


RAHIM Soalannya? Sama ada saya tahu? 1

2

SST Tahu tak? 3

4

RAHIM Saya tak tahu. 5

6

SST Tak tahu. Adakah Encik Rahim tahu tak bahawa sebelum Dr 7

Narayanan berkhidmat dengan, maaf, memberikan consulting work 8

pada Bank Islam beliau adalah lead consultant daripada AT&T Bell 9

Labs untuk Maybank in the reengineering of Maybank’s Consumer 10

Lending Operations. Tahu tak? 11

12

RAHIM Tak. Tidak tahu. 13

14

SST Tidak tahu. 15

16

RAHIM Yang kamu tanya ini macam mana? Maksudnya mereka itu bekerja di 17

situ dan – soalannya very confusing, Yang Arif. 18

19

SST Saya cadangkan kepada. 20

21

ABR Sorry, Yang Arif. I just feel that this question is really ridiculous, Yang 22

Arif, because with due respect to my learned friend, his experience he 23

would not have the personal knowledge, Yang Arif. Dia tak ada 24

semasa orang bekerja macam mana nak jawab dia tahu, tak tahu, 25

Yang Arif? It’s a fair answer that has been given by the witness. Dia 26

tak tahu, Yang Arif. 27

28

SST Ok, never mind. I’ll just put it to him. 29

30


32

SST Saya cadangkan kepada Encik Rahim bahawa semasa. Maaf, biar 33

saya repeat. Saya cadangkan pada Encik Rahim semasa Encik 34

Rahim masih berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam, Encik 35

Rahim mempunyai pengetahuan tentang kepakaran Encik Udaya dan 36


Dr Narayanan seperti mana yang telah saya baca tadi. Setuju atau 1

tidak? 2

3


5

SST Tak setuju. Encik Rahim setuju tak bahawa semasa Encik Rahim 6

masih berkhidmat secara rasmi dengan Bank Islam, Encik Rahim 7

telah pun mengenali Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua. 8

9

RAHIM Ya. 10

11

SST Boleh Encik Rahim sahkan sama ada Encik Rahim telah pun 12

mengenali Encik Razak semasa Encik Razak berkhidmat di Bank 13

Negara Malaysia? 14

15

RAHIM Ya. 16

17

SST Dan dia masih keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa Bank Rakyat yang 18

telah approach Bank Islam dengan tujuan untuk kerjasama untuk 19

projek outsourcing Islamic credit card business untuk Bank Rakyat. 20

21

RAHIM Di mana tu? Page berapa? 22

23

SST Soalan Jawapan No. 9. Encik Rahim dah sampai sana? Adakah dia 24

masih keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa Bank Rakyat approach Bank 25

Islam dengan tujuan untuk kerjasama untuk projek outsourcing Islamic 26

credit card business ini. 27

28

RAHIM Apa yang saya nyatakan di sini, Yang Arif, Bank Rakyat hendak 29

membuat co-branding dengan Bank Islam. Saya tidak sebut pun 30

pasal, apa tu, outsourcing dengan Bank Islam. Cuma keinginan saja, 31

dia keinginan. Tapi dari segi perjumpaan saya dengan Bank Rakyat 32

tu, mereka hendak buat co-branding. Cuma keinginan Bank Rakyat 33

hendak buat outsourcing. Itu keinginan. 34

35


SST Encik Rahim, soalan seterusnya. Adakah, cuma nak sahkan, adakah 1

ia keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa Bank Islam enggan bekerjasama 2

dengan Bank Rakyat kerana isu BAFIA. 3

4

RAHIM Kerahsiaan pelanggan. 5

6

SST BAFIA? 7

8

RAHIM Ya. 9

10

SST Adakah ia masih keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa memandangkan 11

Bank Islam tidak berminat untuk bekerjasama dengan Bank Rakyat, 12

Encik Rahim telah memperkenalkan Encik Udaya dan Dr Narayanan 13

daripada Plaintif kepada Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua 14

untuk membolehkan mereka membuat pertimbangan sama ada untuk 15

cuba mendapatkan projek ini. 16

17

RAHIM Di page berapa? 18

19

SST Soalan Jawapan No. 11. Jawapan Encik Rahim? Ya? You nak baca? 20

21

RAHIM Soalannya di mana? 22

23

SST Adakah ia masih keterangan Encik Rahim bahawa memandangkan 24

Bank Islam tidak berminat untuk bekerjasama dengan Bank Rakyat, 25

Encik Rahim telah memperkenalkan Encik Udaya dan Dr Narayanan 26

daripada Plaintif kepada Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua 27

untuk membolehkan mereka membuat pertimbangan sama ada untuk 28

cuba memperolehi projek Bank Rakyat tersebut. 29

30

RAHIM Saya memperkenalkan Razak kepada Uday dan Narayanan. 31

32

SST Adakah Encik Rahim setuju bahawa sebelum Encik Rahim 33

memperkenalkan Encik Razak daripada Defendan Kedua kepada 34

Encik Udaya dan Dr Narayanan daripada Plaintif, Encik Rahim 35

sebenarnya telah pun tahu bahawa Defendan Kedua telah pun sendiri 36


membida untuk projek Bank Rakyat tersebut tapi telah gagal. Encik 1

Rahim tahu tak? 2

3

RAHIM Tak tahu saya. 4

5

SST Tak tahu? 6

7

RAHIM Tak tahu. 8

9


11

ABR Kita ada date Monday, Yang Arif. 12

13

SST Hari Isnin. 14

15

YA Monday? 16

17

ABR Monday. 18

19

YA (01:13:05 inaudible). Hari Isnin kita mula pukul 9:00? 20

21

SST Much obliged. 22

23


25

26

27

AKHIR 28

29

MASA : 4: 52 PM 30

31

32

33

34

dalam mahkamah tinggi malaya di kuala lumpur1 2 …...mar 18, 2017 · 1 dalam mahkamah tinggi...

Documents