On the 24th of June 2018, I told a press conference that former Bank Negara Gevernor Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz knew the identities of persons and companies that facilitated the transfer of RM2.6 billion into Najib’s Ambank account.
Not only did Zeti know the money was a donation from the Saudi Royal family, it was she who suggested that the money be transferred into Najib’s personal account.
The person who entered these claims into a 2015 investigation paper by the MACC was none other than Dato’ Seri Mohd Shukri Abdull, who, at the time, was yet to be appointed head of the anti-graft agency.
The investigation paper, put together by him, was titled “Kertas Siasatan Terhadap Najib Razak” and pertained discoveries made by the MACC into 1MDB.
Then, in a shocking turn of events, on the 3rd of July 2018, Zeti denied having any knowledge of the RM2.6 billion, meaning, the paper Shukri prepared in 2015 should immediately have become a point of contention for the GoM.
THE THIRD FORCE
Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor was called for questioning yesterday by the MACC on counts of having allegedly committed offences under the Anti-Money Laundering Act, Anti-Terrorism Financing Act and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLA) 2001. Following a 13 hour ordeal with invesigators from the anti-graft agency, the wife of former Malaysian premier Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak was seen exiting the MACC headquarters at 10.42 pm with her counsels, K Kumaraendran and Geethan Ram Vincent. The person leading the so-called “renewed investigations into 1MDB” is none other than Dato’ Seri Mohd Shukri Abdull, the current chief commissioner of the MACC.
Does that not reek of mala fide intent?
Everything that has to do with investigations into 1MDB or anything even remotely related to the Malaysian fund by the MACC does. The fact that Shukri is heading the anti-graft agency is itself proof that the Government of Malaysia (GoM) under Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad is committed to abusing the system of enforcement and justice to implicate Najib and Rosmah of crime.
Abusing the system of enforcement and justice?
Yes.
On the 24th of June 2018, I told a press conference (watch video below) that former Bank Negara Gevernor Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz knew the identities of persons and companies that facilitated the transfer of RM2.6 billion into Najib’s Ambank account. Not only did Zeti know the money was a donation from the Saudi Royal family, it was she who suggested that the money be transferred into Najib’s personal account.
The person who entered these claims into a 2015 investigation paper by the MACC was none other than Shukri, who, at the time, was yet to be appointed head of the anti-graft agency. The investigation paper, put together by him, was titled “Kertas Siasatan Terhadap Najib Razak” and pertained discoveries made by the MACC into 1MDB. Zeti was the governor of Bank Negara at the time the said discoveries were conducted.
Three years later, following the 14th general election (GE14), the new Pakatan Harapan government under Mahathir’s leadership wasted very little time in appointing Shukri as the new head of MACC. Shukri immediately took to the media to disclose how he was “threatened, bullied and called a traitor” by persons from the Najib administration. But not only did he commit an offence by failing to report the matter to the authorities, the disclosure meant that the 2015 investigation paper he prepared may have been put together under duress.
So tell me, how could he be the one to lead the so-called “renewed investigations into 1MDB?” How could the GoM have undertaken to appoint him as MACC head when clearly, the paper he prepared in 2015 should automatically have become a point of contention for the GoM? If indeed he was “pressured” to skew discoveries in Najib’s favour, is it not logical that the paper he prepared is factually flawed? And given that he has yet to declare the paper to be flawed, is it also not possible that he lied about being “threatened and bullied” by persons from the Najib administration?
So Shukri Abdull is Mahathir’s pawn?
Of course he is!
Everything that has to do with charges preferred by the MACC against Najib and Rosmah on any count is fundamentally flawed owing to Shukri’s personal prejudice against Najib. Not only did the MACC chief fail to call Zeti in for questioning, he failed to recuse himself from investigations and resign as head of the MACC following the police reports I lodged against him and Zeti. The MACC should have been led by anyone but Shukri, a fact the Attorney-General of Malaysia, Tommy Thomas, should have pointed out to the GoM in his capacity as principal legal advisor to government. But did Tommy do anything of that sort?
No.
There is a conspiracy involving Zeti, Shukri and Tommy?
Do I still need to spell it out?
None of the reports I lodged against Zeti and Shukri were looked into by the police
Every single charge that has been brought against Najib to date has been “engineered” with mala fide intent. The MACC under Shukri is clearly prejudiced against the former premier and is bent on helping Mahathir finish him off. The fact that this is true is corroborated by a testimony Zeti gave the media on the 3rd of July 2018. On that day, the former Bank Negara Governor denied having any knowledge of the RM2.6 billion that ended in Najib’s personal bank account.
Now, not only is it impossible for the governor of a central bank not to be in the know when such colossal sums are transacted under his (or her) nose, her testimony smothered Shukri’s 2015 paper further with ambiguity given that the entry Shukri made in the paper contradicted her denial. Tommy should immediately have advised the GoM to have Shukri suspended as MACC head and put under the microscope on suspicion of having fabricated evidence. But did Tommy do anything of that sort?
No.
So perhaps we petition Tommy Thomas to do so?
Why bother?
Why bother when Tommy himself shouldn’t be the Attorney-General of Malaysia? On the 4th of September 2018, I wrote:
Yesterday, everyone was shocked.
The MACC expressed shock. Ramkarpal expressed shock. Even Lim Guan Eng expressed shock. Mahathir, who twisted the arms of judiciary back in the eighties, himself expressed ‘shock’ that Lim Kit Siang’s son was acquitted of corruption charges by the Penang High Court. But it didn’t seem to shock him one bit that the acquittal came days after Tommy Thomas displayed a strong streak of filial loyalty towards the ruling Pakatan Harapan.
Yes Tommy, the man who was appointed Attorney-General (AG) by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on Mahathir’s advice. On the 25th of August 2018, the AG told Malaysians to manage their expectations amid the hue and cry over Pakatan’s failure to deliver on its manifesto pledges. His partiality in favour of the ruling coalition smothered his reputation further in ambiguity following the unmistakable prejudice he displayed in 2016. Back then, Tommy concluded in an article published by Malaysiakini that Najib was guilty of having taken money from 1MDB despite the case not having been tried in any court of law.
It is a wonder Mahathir found him fit to be the AG.
It is an even bigger wonder that Ramkarpal wasn’t shocked when Tommy appeared as lead prosecutor on the 4thof July 2018. On that day, Najib was produced at the Kuala Lumpur High Court by the MACC to enter his plea on corruption charges. One would have expected the ever so righteous Ramkarpal to immediately point out the element of conflict that existed in Tommy’s appearance and question the AG on his comprehension of law. But not only did the son of Karpal remain silent, so did Kit Siang, who, in the eighties and nineties, would have been the first to open his mouth and demand that the AG be sacked.
And today, it is Tommy’s Chambers that withdrew its case against Kit Siang’s son. Ramkarpal should immediately have thrown down the gauntlet and declared that “enough is enough,” that our system of justice is “crumbling like a cookie.” He should have pointed out that the AGC was smothered in ambiguity from the moment Tommy was appointed AG to the moment his Chambers withdrew the case. Instead, he trained his guns at the MACC (READ HERE) in what appeared to be a clever attempt to shift the spotlight away from the AG. Seriously, who the heck cares about the MACC?
Was it not the AGC that ultimately withdrew its case against Lim?
Need I say more?
No comments:
Post a Comment