The Wall Street Journal’s allegations against Malaysia have been proven to be lies, this time by the Monetary Authority of Singapore, said Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s press aide.
Tengku Shariffuddin Tengku Ahmad noted how the publication alleged that Goldman Sachs wired US$3 billion in proceeds of a 1MDB bond issuance to BSI Bank in Singapore, and that some of these funds were later transferred to the prime minister.
However, he said the Monetary Authority of Singapore revealed that no bank in Singapore received the US$3 billion wire transfer from Goldman Sachs in relation to the bond issuance for 1MDB.
“Despite the gravity of their allegations, the WSJ gave no evidence at all to support their claims – as is now standard process in their Malaysia reporting.
“In a cowardly tactic to avoid being sued, the WSJ attributes all its allegations to anonymous sources, such as ‘people familiar with the matter’ and unnamed ‘investigators’,” he added in a media statement.
This spokesman might have done better to wait before barking, given that his own boss has himself issued so little information to explain exactly where 1MDB’s money disappeared to – or how a billion dollars ended up in his own account.
Frankly, such is the lack of transparency over 1MDB, people have been justified in speculating the worst; and when evidence emerged that the worst had indeed occurred this Prime Minister has not dared to test the facts in court.
So, his spokespeople should not try to make hay out of small details, which journalists may have got wrong as they attempt to tease the truth from a massive cover-up, because, as in this case, the truth can turn out to have been even worse than originally reported!
The minor error related to which branch of BSI bank received the $3 billion. It turned out to be the Swiss Headquarters rather than Singapore, which is even more damaging for the bank, which has been trying to contain its involvement in the scandal to its Singapore operations (now closed down).
Najib’s spokesman has compounded matters by further alleging that the reason his boss can’t sue the WSJ is because the WSJ has not revealed its sources, which is ridiculous.
If the WSJ was publishing untruths it would be the easiest thing in the world for Najib to demonstrate this was the case, by bringing the true facts before the courts and issuing proper company accounts.
If he has nothing to hide, why so much hidden?
Former Sarawak Report journalist Lester Melanyi (pix) has penned a book on an alleged plot to topple Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
The book is scheduled to hit the streets by October this year.
The book would carry his account of working with Sarawak Report editor Clare Rewcastle-Brown, he told Bernama in an interview recently.
He claimed that Rewcastle-Brown had collaborated with certain politicians in Malaysia to use Sarawak Report as a platform to topple Najib.
Lying Lester Melanyi has never written a word for Sarawak Report.
He signed up as a volunteer for the separate Iban/Malay radio team, Radio Free Sarawak for a very few months in 2011, but was described by other volunteers as lazy and worse than useless, so the team did not ask him to stay.
Najib’s propagandists are welcome to waste their money on him, because no one believes a word of his inconsistent nonsense.
Immigration director-general Sakib Kusmi says he is empowered by the law to decide whether or not government critics can leave the country.
Thus, he said, the ban list was based on his own discretion, as well as the advice of other enforcement agencies.
“For example, if the police say someone is dangerous, even though it (the matter) has not gone to court yet, we can take action,” he said when met at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport today.
He was commenting further on his previous remarks that critics of the government would not be allowed to leave the country….
Sakib defended the barring of critics as a preventive measure.
“We don’t want to act only after something happens,” he said without elaborating.
He also said there was a difference between criticising the government and insulting it.
“As long you have no intention to be radical, there’s no problem… You can criticise, but it must be positive criticism.
“Not criticism saying this person is no good. Some don’t even criticise but insult, that is worse.”
However, he denied that this was politicking
This chap in a uniform, hired by the Rakyat, is exceeding his powers.
In fact, he doesn’t appear to understand his powers, let alone half the things he is talking about.
He is, therefore, far more dangerous a character to the safety of individuals and the state than all the people he is arbitrarily trying to shut in and shut out of the country.
If ‘preventative action’ is needed it should be against him, in order to stop him from shooting from the hip at anyone he personally decides has produced criticism that he has concluded is not ‘positive’ criticism, but negative.
As if he knew one from the other, given that the distinction is subjective.
Someone should take legal action against this fellow for assuming that his job in overseeing orderly immigration procedures is a way of harassing upright citizens, who might happen to disagree with his boss.
Raja Petra wrote, “The non-Muslim Chinese and Indians may have earned the right to call themselves Malaysian citizens but that does not mean they have also earned the right to tell Muslims how they should practice Islam.
“Andy Yong needs to do a reality check and not assume that his Malaysian citizenship means he can define Islam. Islam is defined by the Quran and not by people like Andy Yong.”
“What is he trying to prove?” retorted Yong, a lawyer.
“First of all, I have never attempted to define Islam, but the constitutional aspect of it.
“What I explained was it is inevitable that if Hadi’s bill comes into force, it will affect the non-Muslims as well,” he said…..
He was responding to the article titled ‘Chinese should stop trying to prove they are stupid’…
This blogger’s present trademark is to insult the Chinese and other non-Malays, which is particularly sad since he is married to a Chinese.
However, his own credentials are shaky when claiming to speak for Malays.
His mother was British and he took up his right to citizenship and a UK passport when he fell foul of libel law in Malaysia (and became bankrupt) and fled abroad.
Under Malaysian legislation prohibiting dual citizenship this nullifies his right to a Malay passport.
So, RPK is a foreigner too.
Public Accounts Committee (PAC) chairman Hasan Arifin today denied The Wall Street Journal’s report claiming that the Bank Negara letter proves Good Star Limited was owned by tycoon Low Taek Jho, or better known as Jho Low.
Hasan said this was because Bank Negara Malaysia had stated that the information provided to the PAC was ‘intelligence grade’.
“The PAC is not an intelligence body and the information received must be verified and true.
“Because the information was intelligence grade, the PAC cannot include the information (in its final report) as it would contradict our duties and responsibilities, as well as could create prejudice against various parties,” said the Rompin MP in a statement.
He added that Bank Negara had also concluded its investigations on 1MDB and issued an administrative compound, which had been settled.
Yesterday, after chairing the Umno supreme council meeting, Najib had told reporters that the uproar over the Hudud Bill was a misunderstanding and that he had clarified to the BN component parties.
Hadi’s Bill was not about hudud, he had explained, and it was merely to enhance the punishments the Syariah Courts can mete out.
Wong said most of the non-Muslim BN leaders in Peninsular Malaysia – except a small minority – will accept whatever explanation given by Najib as they cannot survive without BN patronage.
Meanwhile, he said, East Malaysian BN politicians who are not from Umno, will downplay the issue by saying hudud is a Peninsular Malaysia problem.
Najib has shown himself willing to do what it takes to court PAS leaders into joining BN.
However, he should surely be wary of ‘enhancing punishments’ under Hudud.
After all, with the present news coming out from all directions, he himself would stand in danger of losing both hands for thieving and possibly other bits of himself too.
Therefore, he would personally do well to remain with the more modern and moderate penal system contained in Malaysia’s existing constitution, rather than encouraging the introduction of ancient bloody-thirsty rituals from Arabia.
Switzerland will implement a new law in July to help seize and repatriate illicit wealth parked in its banks by foreign dictators, the government has said.
The move is aimed at helping Switzerland and its wealth management industry shake off their image as a secretive haven for ill-gotten riches.
This issue was in the news again this week when the Monetary Authority of Singapore ordered the closure of Swiss private bank BSI’s operations locally, and Swiss prosecutors began criminal proceedings against BSI in the biggest international crackdown on financial entities dealing with a scandal-hit Malaysian government fund…..
Three ordinances cover assets previously seized as a precaution from former presidents Zine El Abidine Ben Ali of Tunisia, Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and Viktor Yanukovych of Ukraine and their inner circles, although all three expire early next year….he government had blocked about US$650 million (S$895 million) in the case of Egypt, 60 million Swiss francs (S$83 million) in the case of Tunisia and about US$70 million regarding Ukraine…
It is good that Switzerland is moving to toughen its laws against kleptocrat looters.
Likewise, David Cameron of the UK warned at his anti-corruption conference this month that “if you want to steal money from your country and invest it in mine I will seize it and give it back to your country”.
Sarawak Report has already reported that Sabah’s Musa Aman stole some US$100 million from timber kickbacks, which were parked via HSBC and UBS Bank in his Zurich accounts – which is a case still pending in Switzerland.
Sarawak’s Taib has money and assets all over the world.
Now their Federal boss Najib is exposed for siphoning no less than US$7 billion from Malaysia… much of it now held in Swiss and other foreign accounts – also in AmBank, which is controlled by ANZ Australia.
It makes him a world record thief compared to the relatively minor sums stolen from the already deposed former leaders mentioned by the Swiss in their statement.
Previously, Pua had raised issue about several lines regarding Bank Negara’s information that had been removed from the final PAC report on 1MDB by Hasan, without the committee’s consent.
“This finding is crucial to the entire investigations of 1MDB because the company and its executives have testified to PAC that Good Star is a subsidiary of PetroSaudi,” Pua said in a statement on April 20.
In a parliamentary reply, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Azalina Othman Said stated that the lines were expunged because the matter is classified and not meant for public consumption.
“The PAC chairperson received Bank Negara’s information which stated all the information given was ‘confidential for the purpose of intelligence only and not for court usage or public report’.
“For your information, all PAC members had been informed of the matter via a letter penned by the PAC chief to the deputy governor of the central bank on April 6.
“Given that PAC report is for public usage, the information should not be included in the report,” Azalina told Bagan MP Lim Guan Eng, who had asked the question, on May 16.
Amongst the team of knowing co-conspirators who will have to go down with Najib, Azalina ranks high.
This outrageous complicity in attempting to make any information that proves the crimes associated with 1MDB and who is responsible into an official secret confirms her complicity.
The small circle of power-abusers around Najib have now made the Auditor General’s evidence and the evidence of Bank Negara to Parliament ‘Official Secrets’, because both are cast iron and undeniable solid evidence that the Prime Minister cannot afford to have made public.
Both these official reports show without any doubt that US$7billion was stolen from 1MDB. They also show that much of it was funnelled through the company Good Star Limited during the PetroSaudi deal. The rest went through the bogus Aabar account and the unaudited SRC International.
This behaviour is not even a ‘cover up’ attempt by the Najib circle, it is merely a ‘shut up’ attempt.
There is no misappropriation in 1MDB’s accounts and administration, Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak told Parliament, quoting the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
Nor are the accounts and administration disorganised, Najib said in a parliamentary written reply.
“PAC has claimed that there is no misappropriation in 1MDB’s accounts and administration, nor was it disorganised,” he said.
“There was only weakness in the administration of the company,” Najib told Mahfuz Omar (Pokok Sena).
Mahfuz asked what actions had been taken by the management after the 1MDB report by PAC was tabled in Parliament.
“The inspector-general of police has said the police will study the PAC’s proposal (to determine) if there is any element that requires further investigation and action,” Najib added.
Hey, did someone pass the PM the wrong report?
Surely, he is not referring to the damning and shocking report of the PAC, which has made clear that there was an appalling misappropriation of money and that it was all down to a system put in place, which gave him total personal charge of the company and by-passed the authority of the board?
Of course, who would not take advantage of a situation where they are appointed judge and jury of their own case?
And if that enables him to claim that a damning report was a vote of confidence then of course he has.
It is onlookers, such as the businessmen cum Lords in the UK, who have chosen to pretend that Najib is subject to genuine judicial processes and to ‘suspend judgement’, who earn greatest opprobrium in this matter and they deserve to be shamed.
British politicians were forced to justify their attendance at an investment event hosted by the Malaysian government in London this week to promote Malaysia as an investment destination.
UK minister in the foreign office, Hugo Swire, told the Wall Street Journal he did not want to cast final judgement over corruption allegations in Malaysia.
He also said British government support for the investment conference did not contradict an anti-corruption conference in London the week before.
“What we decided there and what was discussed there has universal application but I am not aware that that should impact on anything we are discussing this afternoon,” Swire reportedly said.
“I am not setting myself up as a judge and a jury.”
Jonathan Marland, a House of Lords member and former British trade envoy told the Wall Street Journal he did not want to interfere in Malaysia’s internal matters by commenting on 1MDB.
Marland, who introduced Najib at the event, reportedly described the event as a “huge love-in”.
“When our country was on its knees you came and invested,” Marland reportedly told Najib, referring to the RM4 billion Battersea redevelopment by SP Setia, Sime Darby and the Employees’ Provident Fund (EPF)
Hugo Swire might have done better to have stayed as the Minister in charge of Museums, if he hadn’t been sacked for suggesting that visitors should be charged.
It is certainly unfortunate that his present position is so directly related (as Foreign Office Minister for Far East matters) to his family’s vast business in the region (the Swire Group).
Hugo, nevertheless, made huge play of his outrage over China’s anti-democratic tendencies in Hong Kong, so one wonders why he is so willing to ignore just as outrageous, if not far worse, human rights abuses in Malaysia, where people are being imprisoned for questioning grand scale corruption?
As for the UK’s signal failure of all the countries caught up in the global 1MDB scandal to take a single action on the matter, it is plainly inadequate to say that the British Government has no ‘proof of wrong-doing’, because Sarawak Report is well aware that the PetroSaudi and other documentation has been made available to UK officials and their ministers for as long and indeed in many cases longer than other countries, where action has been taken.
It is, doubtless, unfortunate also that the government to which Mr Swire belongs, considered the virtual dismantling of the country’s white collar crime agencies to be an essential part of its so-called ‘belt-tightening’ after the 2008 financial crash, which was caused by crooked bankers, who are generally extremely friendly to their party. Sadly, as a result, not one of these crooked bankers has been properly investigated for their crimes, whilst his government has meanwhile chosen to blame “excessive welfare” given to the poorest for that financial crisis.
This government even indulged in deception last week, by informing the UK press that it would avoid any official acknowledgement of Najib’s supposedly “private” visit and then sending their Business Minister Sajeed Jarvid to meet with him anyway.
And it turns out that Swire’s Jardine & Mathesen colleague in the House of Lords, Jonathan Marland, went even so far as to say he welcomed Najib with an open arms “love-in” for so kindly investing Malaysia’s money in the Battersea Power Station development, which has now created an ugly blot on the Southern Thames. Yes, many entities with ready cash invested in the UK post 2008 and have handsomely profited from their advantage.
Yet, if this development is not riddled with corruption and theft from the Malaysian people, Mr Swire will have to accept it will be a first such venture under Najib Razak, who together with his UMNO cronies have never been known not to cut a disgusting private profit from any public venture, and the truth of the Battersea project will inevitably eventually be known to decide that point.
As for the guilt over 1MDB. Mr Swire does not need to be judge and jury in this matter. Najib has himself acknowledged taking a billion dollars into his own account, does Mr Swire need to be judge or jury over that? No, he does not.
Nor is there any question about Malaysia’s plunging human rights situation, which Swire’s betters in the United States Department of State have already properly condemned. The destruction of Malaysia’s democratic base has been conducted purely to protect the reputation of its leader, which Swire has decided to act judge and jury over, in place of the people of Malaysia (now banned from demonstrations and online criticism), by welcoming him to London.
The facts are out there, and it is purely that this UK Government wishes to ignore them. It has tarnished Britain’s reputation that it has done so and has added to the growing world opinion that the City of London is a City of Launderers, which needs instant rectification for the benefit of Britain.