The DAP FT and Selangor State Committee and branch leaders met on 31st March 2016 in Kuala Lumpur and we unanimously resolved to express support for and solidarity with DAP Secretary-General Sdr Lim Guan Eng.
Barisan Nasional has launched it’s fiercest and most stinging attacks against Lim Guan Eng that we have ever seen to date. BN MPs and Ministers are using parliamentary immunity to hurl numerous spurious allegations and outright lies against the Penang Chief Minister.
The BN-owned and dominated media followed up by going to town with the cooked-up scandal. Both Lim Guan Eng and the Party has had to endure the avalanche of malicious attacks via “trial by media”, peppered with unsubstantiated and twisted facts.
Such massive attacks serve to divert attention from the multiple political crises faced by Prime Minister Najib Razak especially arising from the Citizen’s Declaration on 4th March.
The attacks also aim to discredit Guan Eng and the DAP in the upcoming Sarawak state election. The Penang Chief Minister was the most potent political figure for the Opposition in the previous Sarawak state election in April 2011.
Both DAP FT and Selangor proudly stands by the implementation of open tenders by the Penang state government which not only improves transparency but eliminates graft and corruption.
Hence when BN alleged that the controversial land in Taman Manggis was sold to KLIDC in exchange for a bribe via a bungalow bought below market price, we know that it can’t be true. It cannot be true because the said land was sold via open tender to the highest bidder. There’s no need for a bidder to pay a bribe when he has to bid the highest price to win. This is unlike the BN states where land is sold and alienated via direct negotiations.
In addition, the DAP-led Penang government has been accused of betraying the people’s interest by selling the piece of land meant for low-cost housing. That has now been proven to be an utter lie, because it was the then BN state government which rejected the low-cost housing proposal in March 2007. What’s more, the DAP-led Penang government has instead in 2012 commenced a separate low, low-medium cost and affordable housing less than 2 kilometers away in Jalan S P Chelliah. Better still, the Jalan S P Chelliah land is nearly 10 times the size of the land in Taman Manggis.
Therefore, we welcome fair and unbiased investigation into Guan Eng’s purchase of his house. We also hope that the investigations will be expedited so that his name can be cleared as soon as possible.
DAP FT and Selangor calls on our members and supporters to be cognizant of these political calculations, help the party emerge from these attacks stronger, and support Sdr Lim Guan Eng in his battle to clear his name.
Tan Kok Wai & Tony Pua
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Saturday, March 26, 2016
Is Arul Kanda casting doubt on the integrity of the AG’s Report even before it has been tabled in Parliament?
I am stunned that 1MDB President Arul Kanda has started to pre-empt the findings of the Auditor-General’s (AG) Report which has been submitted to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) even before it has been tabled in Parliament.
Arul Kanda said he is confident that the parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) would not just rely on the findings of the auditor-general’s report on 1MDB when it compiles its own report.
"What I can say on the general terms is that the auditor-general’s report (on 1MDB) is very detailed, comprehensive and professional.I am sure the PAC report will reflect all the findings PAC has made, not just based on the auditor-general’s report, but also on the interview and the additional information PAC obtained," he said during his interview with BFM89.9 yesterday.
First of all, given that the AG’s Report was classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA), how did he know the contents of the Report?
Secondly, is Arul Kanda now worried that the AG has tabled a damning report against 1MDB, that he is counting on the BN-dominated PAC to reject the conclusions of the report?
In the past, Arul Kanda has used the fact that the AG’s investigation is proof that 1MDB and the Government are transparent and have nothing to hide. Why is Arul Kanda now attempting to cast doubt on the integrity and accuracy of the completed AG’s Report?
Instead Arul Kanda should tell Malaysians if he has cooperated fully with the AG to ensure that the AG had access to all necessary documents to complete its findings, especially on bank statements of its overseas subsidiaries.
If he has failed to submit even simple bank statements which demonstrates the money trail of 1MDB’s funds, then he is obviously lying to Malaysians when he blamed Malaysians for not trusting explanations from the state-owned fund “because the facts are boring” while the “baseless allegations” made by politicians are “sexy”.
What's more, the 1MDB President has also stubbornly refuse to clarify the simple but substantive allegations Wall Street Journal has made that 1MDB has transferred billions of US Dollars to a fictitious “Aabar Investment PJS Limited” set up in the British Virgin Islands which is completely unrelated to Abu Dhabi’s “Aabar Investment PJS” or its parent, International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC).
If 1MDB did not make these allegedly fraudulent payments, why not just give an unequivocal “NO” in its statements? Instead of answering the allegations, Arul Kanda only chose to twist and turn, while going on the hyperbole to allege some global malicious conspiracy against 1MDB and Malaysia.
Thursday, March 17, 2016
Why has the Royal Malaysian Police not investigated 1MDB's missing Cayman Islands investment funds?
I had asked the Minister of Finance who is the investment bank which is managing the balance of the proceeds in the form of “units” which was redeemed from 1MDB’s Cayman Islands investment amounting to the reported RM940 million.
I received the reply yesterday stating that “no investment bank was appointed to manage state investment firm 1MDB's funds in the Cayman Islands.”
The lies by 1MDB and the Minister of Finance have now come a full circle, which strengthens the suspicions that there was never any substantial money invested in the Cayman Islands. The investment was purportedly made with the US$2.318 billion proceeds from the disposal of 1MDB’s investment with PetroSaudi International Limited.
Instead, the supposed opaque investment now looks like a cover story for 1MDB to hide the fact that the billions of dollars invested with PetroSaudi have been lost through embezzlement and pilferage. In fact the entire scam was so well-thought through that it fooled international auditors KPMG and Deloitte for years.
However, the chickens finally returned to roost when 1MDB was forced to “redeem” the funds from Cayman Islands.
Under pressure from debtors, 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda hurriedly announced on 13 January 2015 that "following a commitment made by the Chairman of the Board of Directors in a statement dated 23 December 2014, 1MDB can confirm that it has now redeemed in full the US$2.318 billion invested by the company in a Cayman Islands registered fund”.
Again, under pressure to explain what exactly has been “redeemed”, Arul Kanda told the Singapore Business Times on 9 February 2015 that “The cash is in our accounts and in US dollars. I can assure you (about that) . . . I have seen the statements.”
The Minister of Finance further confirmed on 11 March 2015 in Parliament that the “cash”was held in BSI Bank in Singapore. He further explained that the money wasn’t repatriated to Malaysia to avoid the hassle of Bank Negara approvals.
However, following a damning exposé by the Sarawak Report that BSI Bank denied the existence of cash held in the 1MDB account, the Minister of Finance retracted his earlier reply in Parliament. On 19 May 2015, and informed the House that the redeemed proceeds were “assets” and not cash.
But a few days later, the mystery had deepened when Second Finance Minister Husni Hanadzlah claimed that what was held in BSI Bank were “units”, when he was asked to clarify on the exact nature of these “assets” in Singapore.
On 10 June 2015, without explaining what these “units” really were, Arul Kanda blamed the entire fiasco of cash to assets to units on “miscommunications on the matter”.
Now, the latest reply from the Finance Minister has proven that Arul Kanda and 1MDB has “miscommunicated” not only on the form of proceeds which were redeemed from the
Caymans investment. The reply showed without a doubt that Arul Kanda and 1MDB lied about the fact that the balance of the US$940 million investment in Caymans were redeemed in the first place.
The purported “investment” is still stuck in Cayman Islands and could not be liquidated.
Even more shocking was the claim by Dato’ Seri Najib Razak that there was no investment bank fund manager for the “units”! How can there be “units” if there is no fund manager?
1MDB must be the first investor in the world who can hold fund manager-less units creating a brand new class of investment assets!
If not, all of the above points to the fact that lies after lies after lies were told by 1MDB and the Government to carry out a massive cover up of the loss of billions of ringgit by 1MDB over its investment in and with PetroSaudi International. For the billions we have invested in PetroSaudi, we are now in possession of worthless or even fake and fraudulent “units”.
Why hasn’t the Royal Malaysian Police conducted a thorough investigation over the missing funds and these dodgy “units” even after I have made my police report exactly in March a year ago?
I received the reply yesterday stating that “no investment bank was appointed to manage state investment firm 1MDB's funds in the Cayman Islands.”
The lies by 1MDB and the Minister of Finance have now come a full circle, which strengthens the suspicions that there was never any substantial money invested in the Cayman Islands. The investment was purportedly made with the US$2.318 billion proceeds from the disposal of 1MDB’s investment with PetroSaudi International Limited.
Instead, the supposed opaque investment now looks like a cover story for 1MDB to hide the fact that the billions of dollars invested with PetroSaudi have been lost through embezzlement and pilferage. In fact the entire scam was so well-thought through that it fooled international auditors KPMG and Deloitte for years.
However, the chickens finally returned to roost when 1MDB was forced to “redeem” the funds from Cayman Islands.
Under pressure from debtors, 1MDB CEO Arul Kanda hurriedly announced on 13 January 2015 that "following a commitment made by the Chairman of the Board of Directors in a statement dated 23 December 2014, 1MDB can confirm that it has now redeemed in full the US$2.318 billion invested by the company in a Cayman Islands registered fund”.
Again, under pressure to explain what exactly has been “redeemed”, Arul Kanda told the Singapore Business Times on 9 February 2015 that “The cash is in our accounts and in US dollars. I can assure you (about that) . . . I have seen the statements.”
The Minister of Finance further confirmed on 11 March 2015 in Parliament that the “cash”was held in BSI Bank in Singapore. He further explained that the money wasn’t repatriated to Malaysia to avoid the hassle of Bank Negara approvals.
However, following a damning exposé by the Sarawak Report that BSI Bank denied the existence of cash held in the 1MDB account, the Minister of Finance retracted his earlier reply in Parliament. On 19 May 2015, and informed the House that the redeemed proceeds were “assets” and not cash.
But a few days later, the mystery had deepened when Second Finance Minister Husni Hanadzlah claimed that what was held in BSI Bank were “units”, when he was asked to clarify on the exact nature of these “assets” in Singapore.
On 10 June 2015, without explaining what these “units” really were, Arul Kanda blamed the entire fiasco of cash to assets to units on “miscommunications on the matter”.
Now, the latest reply from the Finance Minister has proven that Arul Kanda and 1MDB has “miscommunicated” not only on the form of proceeds which were redeemed from the
Caymans investment. The reply showed without a doubt that Arul Kanda and 1MDB lied about the fact that the balance of the US$940 million investment in Caymans were redeemed in the first place.
The purported “investment” is still stuck in Cayman Islands and could not be liquidated.
Even more shocking was the claim by Dato’ Seri Najib Razak that there was no investment bank fund manager for the “units”! How can there be “units” if there is no fund manager?
1MDB must be the first investor in the world who can hold fund manager-less units creating a brand new class of investment assets!
If not, all of the above points to the fact that lies after lies after lies were told by 1MDB and the Government to carry out a massive cover up of the loss of billions of ringgit by 1MDB over its investment in and with PetroSaudi International. For the billions we have invested in PetroSaudi, we are now in possession of worthless or even fake and fraudulent “units”.
Why hasn’t the Royal Malaysian Police conducted a thorough investigation over the missing funds and these dodgy “units” even after I have made my police report exactly in March a year ago?
Wednesday, March 16, 2016
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak makes rare appearance in Parliament; fails miserably to address twin scandals of 1MDB and RM2.6 billion
The Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak made a rare appearance today in the Parliament to answer a question posed by the Member from Ketereh, Tan Sri Annuar Musa, who happens to be the new UMNO information chief.
Tan Sri Annuar had asked how Malaysia will collaborate with ASEAN countries to overcome the economic uncertainties we face today.
I had the opportunity to ask a supplementary question, where I raised the fact that the economic uncertainties and the crisis of confidence facing Malaysia today have been caused to a large part by the twin RM55 billion 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) and RM2.6 billion “donation” scandals.
I emphasized to the House that there has been an unprecedented degree of negative foreign media interest in Malaysia as a result of the Prime Minister’s failure to address these unanswered scandals. The clearest example would be the journalists from Australia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) taking a flight all the way to Kuching just to seek a comment from the Prime Minister “if you could explain the hundreds of million in your account?”
For their troubles they were detained by the police for 6 hours and had their passports temporarily confiscated. The attempt to further charge them for allegedly obstructing public officials from their duties, before they were subsequently withdrawn and the journalists deported further disgraced the nation in the eyes of the global community.
The refusal by Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to answer the simple question further cement the perception of guilt and wrongdoing not only among Malaysians but to the entire world.
Hence I asked, what was the Prime Minister going to do to address these scandals to reduce the economic uncertainty and crisis of confidence affecting the country’s economy.
Unfortunately, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak failed miserably to use the golden opportunity in Parliament, on live television to reveal the truth behind the scandals and silence all vehement critics on these matters.
The Prime Minister chose to paint the so-called attacks as an “orchestrated campaign”against his government and only promised that "I am responsible to the people... The process of accountability in the country will continue".
Even his re-assertion that he will let the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) decide on the RM2.6 billion “donation” and 1MDB scandals rings hollow after singing the same tune for more than a year, where he had pro-actively stifled the investigations on these matters, including the sacking of the former Attorney-General.
Malaysians do not want to hear Dato’ Seri Najib promising investigations. Malaysians want to hear from the Prime Minister himself with regards to these scandals because more than RM2.6 billion was found to have appeared in his own personal bank account.
Hence the question everyone is asking is, why the heck can’t Dato’ Seri Najib Razak let Malaysians know why these obscene sums of money were found in his personal account himself? Why does he need investigators to tell him why the money appeared in his account in order to tell Malaysians and the watching world? This is particularly since it has been more than 8 months since the scandals were exposed?
The above proved that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak has failed to be accountable as the Prime Minister of Malaysians, and further justify why all Malaysians should sign and support the Citizen’s Declaration seeking the removal of the Prime Minister and institutionalise reforms in the Malaysian Government.
Tan Sri Annuar had asked how Malaysia will collaborate with ASEAN countries to overcome the economic uncertainties we face today.
I had the opportunity to ask a supplementary question, where I raised the fact that the economic uncertainties and the crisis of confidence facing Malaysia today have been caused to a large part by the twin RM55 billion 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) and RM2.6 billion “donation” scandals.
I emphasized to the House that there has been an unprecedented degree of negative foreign media interest in Malaysia as a result of the Prime Minister’s failure to address these unanswered scandals. The clearest example would be the journalists from Australia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) taking a flight all the way to Kuching just to seek a comment from the Prime Minister “if you could explain the hundreds of million in your account?”
For their troubles they were detained by the police for 6 hours and had their passports temporarily confiscated. The attempt to further charge them for allegedly obstructing public officials from their duties, before they were subsequently withdrawn and the journalists deported further disgraced the nation in the eyes of the global community.
The refusal by Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to answer the simple question further cement the perception of guilt and wrongdoing not only among Malaysians but to the entire world.
Hence I asked, what was the Prime Minister going to do to address these scandals to reduce the economic uncertainty and crisis of confidence affecting the country’s economy.
Unfortunately, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak failed miserably to use the golden opportunity in Parliament, on live television to reveal the truth behind the scandals and silence all vehement critics on these matters.
The Prime Minister chose to paint the so-called attacks as an “orchestrated campaign”against his government and only promised that "I am responsible to the people... The process of accountability in the country will continue".
Even his re-assertion that he will let the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) decide on the RM2.6 billion “donation” and 1MDB scandals rings hollow after singing the same tune for more than a year, where he had pro-actively stifled the investigations on these matters, including the sacking of the former Attorney-General.
Malaysians do not want to hear Dato’ Seri Najib promising investigations. Malaysians want to hear from the Prime Minister himself with regards to these scandals because more than RM2.6 billion was found to have appeared in his own personal bank account.
Hence the question everyone is asking is, why the heck can’t Dato’ Seri Najib Razak let Malaysians know why these obscene sums of money were found in his personal account himself? Why does he need investigators to tell him why the money appeared in his account in order to tell Malaysians and the watching world? This is particularly since it has been more than 8 months since the scandals were exposed?
The above proved that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak has failed to be accountable as the Prime Minister of Malaysians, and further justify why all Malaysians should sign and support the Citizen’s Declaration seeking the removal of the Prime Minister and institutionalise reforms in the Malaysian Government.
Tuesday, March 15, 2016
Felda Global Venture must end its value-destroying acquisition spree which smacks of utter recklessness and sheer incompetence
Felda Global Venture Holdings Bhd (FGVH) has been the undisputed worst plantation stock performer ever since its initial public offering (IPO) in July 2012. The share price decline was so bad that the company was removed from the Bursa Malaysia KLSE Index stocks last year.
Since its hyped-up listing at RM4.45 per share, the battered government-linked stock closed at RM1.51 yesterday representing a whopping 66% decline in share prices. Despite its acquisition spree since then, FGVH net profits have tanked from RM1.33 billion in the financial year ending 31 December 2011 to a pitiful RM117 million in 2015.
Among its major acquisitions included Pontian United Plantations Bhd at RM1.2 billion in October 2013, Asian Plantations Ltd at RM568 million in October 2014 and Felda Iffco South China Ltd at approximately RM181 million. The undisputed turkey of the year however will go to FGVH’s proposed US$680 million 37% acquisition of Eagle High Plantations (EHP) at the outrageous price of Rp775 per share in June 2015 whose stock price closed at Rp270 yesterday. That means FGVH will pay nearly 3 times the market price of EHP, an absurd acquisition by any measure!
The EHP deal has yet to be completed but FGVH is in a limbo because the company paid a exorbitant 25% non-refundable deposit of US$174.5 million for the shares of EHP already!
The spate of acquisitions by FGVH should by right be earnings accretive, meaning they will add profits to the group. However, despite having used up all of its cash raised during the initial public offering in 2012, the more acquisitions it conducts, the less profits it makes.
In another stunning announcement last week, before the dust over EHP has settled, FGVH is now proposing to acquire 55% of Zhong Ling Nutri-Oil Holdings Ltd for RM976 million. Zhong Ling is a company registered in Cayman Islands with interests in the Chinese market refining and distributing peanut and other edible vegetable oils.
There are many questions arising from this particular transaction including the reason for FGVH to acquire a peanut oil company and variances arising from a complicated profit guarantee by Zhong Ling’s vendors.
However, the biggest question which FGVH must answer to its shareholders, which include not only state-owned funds like EPF and Tabung Haji, but also more than 90,000 Felda settlers is, why is FGVH acquiring a company which has failed to complete its audited accounts since December 2013!
The failure to complete and table Zhong Ling’s financial audit for December 2014 or 2015 in a timely manner by a reputable international auditor is the clearest warning sign that all is not well within Zhong Ling. It gives the signal that Zhong Ling’s shareholders are seeking a profitable exit by disposing of the troubled assets to a company desperate to boost its earnings.
If Zhong Ling is indeed financially sound, why shouldn’t FGVH just request for the company to complete its missing audit first before negotiating the acquisition. Why must FGVH rush in headlong into the acquisition, bear the risk of an unaudited company backed by a highly questionable guarantee arrangement by Zhong Ling’s main shareholder?
We call upon the Board of Directors of FGVH to protect the interest of the company’s shareholders by immediately terminating the acquisition. The deal should only ever be considered after Zhong Ling has regularized its audit short-comings, and even so, only if the latter allows a separate independent audit be carried out to verify the financial statements.
Since its hyped-up listing at RM4.45 per share, the battered government-linked stock closed at RM1.51 yesterday representing a whopping 66% decline in share prices. Despite its acquisition spree since then, FGVH net profits have tanked from RM1.33 billion in the financial year ending 31 December 2011 to a pitiful RM117 million in 2015.
Among its major acquisitions included Pontian United Plantations Bhd at RM1.2 billion in October 2013, Asian Plantations Ltd at RM568 million in October 2014 and Felda Iffco South China Ltd at approximately RM181 million. The undisputed turkey of the year however will go to FGVH’s proposed US$680 million 37% acquisition of Eagle High Plantations (EHP) at the outrageous price of Rp775 per share in June 2015 whose stock price closed at Rp270 yesterday. That means FGVH will pay nearly 3 times the market price of EHP, an absurd acquisition by any measure!
The EHP deal has yet to be completed but FGVH is in a limbo because the company paid a exorbitant 25% non-refundable deposit of US$174.5 million for the shares of EHP already!
The spate of acquisitions by FGVH should by right be earnings accretive, meaning they will add profits to the group. However, despite having used up all of its cash raised during the initial public offering in 2012, the more acquisitions it conducts, the less profits it makes.
In another stunning announcement last week, before the dust over EHP has settled, FGVH is now proposing to acquire 55% of Zhong Ling Nutri-Oil Holdings Ltd for RM976 million. Zhong Ling is a company registered in Cayman Islands with interests in the Chinese market refining and distributing peanut and other edible vegetable oils.
There are many questions arising from this particular transaction including the reason for FGVH to acquire a peanut oil company and variances arising from a complicated profit guarantee by Zhong Ling’s vendors.
However, the biggest question which FGVH must answer to its shareholders, which include not only state-owned funds like EPF and Tabung Haji, but also more than 90,000 Felda settlers is, why is FGVH acquiring a company which has failed to complete its audited accounts since December 2013!
The failure to complete and table Zhong Ling’s financial audit for December 2014 or 2015 in a timely manner by a reputable international auditor is the clearest warning sign that all is not well within Zhong Ling. It gives the signal that Zhong Ling’s shareholders are seeking a profitable exit by disposing of the troubled assets to a company desperate to boost its earnings.
If Zhong Ling is indeed financially sound, why shouldn’t FGVH just request for the company to complete its missing audit first before negotiating the acquisition. Why must FGVH rush in headlong into the acquisition, bear the risk of an unaudited company backed by a highly questionable guarantee arrangement by Zhong Ling’s main shareholder?
We call upon the Board of Directors of FGVH to protect the interest of the company’s shareholders by immediately terminating the acquisition. The deal should only ever be considered after Zhong Ling has regularized its audit short-comings, and even so, only if the latter allows a separate independent audit be carried out to verify the financial statements.
Monday, March 14, 2016
Dato' Sri Azalina Othman must clarify contradictions between her statement and MACC's on the Prime Minister receiving money from SRC International
I had asked in Parliament last week whether the Attorney-General has investigated the RM27 million deposited into the Prime Minister’s personal bank account on 8 July 2014, which originated from SRC International. In addition, RM3.2 million of the sum was used to repay Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s Visa and Mastercard bills. Was this not a criminal breach of trust?
The response from the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman is shocking both in the lack of and discrepancy in the details.
"MACC's investigations on SRC International show that the prime minister has not committed any corrupt practice," she said in a written reply to me.
Firstly, how could it be that RM27 million which found its way to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account, which was exposed by none other than the Attorney-General himself, be dismissed summarily without any basis that there was no criminal breach of trust?
What is more, the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Apandi Ali’s evidence which he showed to reporters during his press conference in January showed how RM3.2 million of the money was channelled to pay the Prime Minister’s credit card bills.
Unless the Prime Minister or the Attorney-General can give impossibly good reasons why the transfers took place, there is a clear-cut prima facie case to charge the Dato’ Seri Najib Razak for criminal breach of trust.
Secondly, Dato’ Azalina’s assertion that Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s investigations on the matter showed no “corrupt practice” is completely contrary to the statement issued by the MACC Oversight Panel issued on 24 February 2016.
“The panel agreed that MACC resubmit its investigation papers regarding SRC International to the Attorney-General for review... Since MACC’s investigation into the alleged RM2.6 billion donation case is still incomplete, the panel recommended to MACC that it continue its investigation into the case and seek the Attorney-General’s assistance to issue the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) in order for MACC to obtain evidence and documents from financial institutions based overseas as part of its investigation into the RM2.6 billion,” the statement read.
The MACC Oversight Panel statement could only mean that the investigation is still “incomplete” and MACC was seeking the assistance of the Attorney-General to obtain overseas MLA to access additional evidence.
Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman must clarify why her statement contradicted that of the MACC’s. Has she misled the parliament in her reply in order to exonerate her direct superior, Dato’Seri Najib Razak.
If she fails to provide clarifications and evidence that MACC has indeed “cleared” the Prime Minister of all crimes, that we will consider referring the Minister to the House Committee of Rights and Privileges for intentionally misleading the Parliament.
...sama ada Peguam Negara telah menyiasat deposit RM27 juta ke dalam akaun bank Menteri Kewangan pada 8 Julai 2014 yang berpunca daripada SRC International, yang antaranya RM3.2 juta digunakan untuk membayar bil kad kreditnya. Adakah ini merupakan kesalahan pecah amanah?
The response from the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman is shocking both in the lack of and discrepancy in the details.
"MACC's investigations on SRC International show that the prime minister has not committed any corrupt practice," she said in a written reply to me.
Firstly, how could it be that RM27 million which found its way to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account, which was exposed by none other than the Attorney-General himself, be dismissed summarily without any basis that there was no criminal breach of trust?
What is more, the Attorney-General, Tan Sri Apandi Ali’s evidence which he showed to reporters during his press conference in January showed how RM3.2 million of the money was channelled to pay the Prime Minister’s credit card bills.
Unless the Prime Minister or the Attorney-General can give impossibly good reasons why the transfers took place, there is a clear-cut prima facie case to charge the Dato’ Seri Najib Razak for criminal breach of trust.
Secondly, Dato’ Azalina’s assertion that Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s investigations on the matter showed no “corrupt practice” is completely contrary to the statement issued by the MACC Oversight Panel issued on 24 February 2016.
“The panel agreed that MACC resubmit its investigation papers regarding SRC International to the Attorney-General for review... Since MACC’s investigation into the alleged RM2.6 billion donation case is still incomplete, the panel recommended to MACC that it continue its investigation into the case and seek the Attorney-General’s assistance to issue the Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) in order for MACC to obtain evidence and documents from financial institutions based overseas as part of its investigation into the RM2.6 billion,” the statement read.
The MACC Oversight Panel statement could only mean that the investigation is still “incomplete” and MACC was seeking the assistance of the Attorney-General to obtain overseas MLA to access additional evidence.
Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman must clarify why her statement contradicted that of the MACC’s. Has she misled the parliament in her reply in order to exonerate her direct superior, Dato’Seri Najib Razak.
If she fails to provide clarifications and evidence that MACC has indeed “cleared” the Prime Minister of all crimes, that we will consider referring the Minister to the House Committee of Rights and Privileges for intentionally misleading the Parliament.
Thursday, March 10, 2016
Did the Ministry of Finance invent a fictitious project to cover up for funds being transferred from SRC International to Putra Perdana?
I had asked the Minister of Finance to explain why SRC International paid RM170 million to Putra Perdana Construction between 8 July 2014 to 8 August 2014. Mysteriously this amount was also returned to SRC International at the end of 2014. SRC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the finance ministry.
In the reply received yesterday, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said SRC International Sdn Bhd paid RM170 million to Syarikat Putra Perdana Construction for a turnkey project.
Najib said in Parliament today that Putra Perdana Construction returned the money to SRC, following cancellation of the project.
This must be the very first time in Malaysia where a Government subsidiary received promptly a full refund for a supposedly cancelled project. The excuse given by the Finance Minister which was not substantiated with any details or evidence, is almost as unbelievable as the Prime Minister receiving RM2.6 billion of Arab donation.
What was the value of the project which required SRC International to pay in advance a whopping RM170 million? Given that SRC International is a wholly-owned government subsidiary, what exactly is this mega-project which escaped scrutiny, report and mention by any Minister or media?
What’s more, the Parliament has been previously informed that SRC International was specifically involved in the overseas investment in strategic energy and mining sectors. How such a project worth at least hundreds of millions of ringgit, if not billions, awarded to a mid-sized local construction company in anyway related to its stated mandate?
Worse, the actual amount transferred to Putra Perdana Construction was RM197 million, of which only RM170 million was returned. The balance of the RM27 million was channelled to Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal account by Putra Perdana Construction immediately upon receipt from SRC International.
If the sums transferred were indeed for a unnamed mega-project, then why was the RM27 million not returned by Putra Perdana to SRC International but instead “given” to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak?
Hence the utterly feeble reply provided by the Minister lends credence to the view that the unnamed fictitious project was made up in order to cover up illicit transactions between SRC International and Putra Perdana.
Furthermore, in the Finance Minister’s reply, he said based on Malaysian parliamentary rules, he did not need to respond to allegations on the RM27 million, which was based on a news report.
"SRC does not have any information with regards to the issue on the money that was channelled to the bank account of Finance Minister, and this was based on news report from a portal, (in) which the source of the news was unverified. In view of this, under the Standing Order 23(1)(i), the matter need not be answered, as it is one to seek clarification over a news report," Dato’ Seri Najib said.
The failure to provide an answer to the RM27 million is completely unacceptable because the information was not “based on a news report”, but instead based on a chart openly displayed by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali during a press conference. The Finance Minister’s refusal to answer a perfectly valid question arising from information provided by the Attorney-General himself demonstrates an utter contempt the Minister has for the Parliament.
The only way for the Prime Minister to be absolved of the alleged crimes is to come clean with all the necessary evidence to be judge by all Malaysians.
However, the failure by the Prime Minister to shed light on the matter goes to only to strengthen the suspicions and belief of ordinary Malaysians that tax-payers money has been illicitly transferred from state-owned entities to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal account.
In the reply received yesterday, the Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said SRC International Sdn Bhd paid RM170 million to Syarikat Putra Perdana Construction for a turnkey project.
Najib said in Parliament today that Putra Perdana Construction returned the money to SRC, following cancellation of the project.
This must be the very first time in Malaysia where a Government subsidiary received promptly a full refund for a supposedly cancelled project. The excuse given by the Finance Minister which was not substantiated with any details or evidence, is almost as unbelievable as the Prime Minister receiving RM2.6 billion of Arab donation.
What was the value of the project which required SRC International to pay in advance a whopping RM170 million? Given that SRC International is a wholly-owned government subsidiary, what exactly is this mega-project which escaped scrutiny, report and mention by any Minister or media?
What’s more, the Parliament has been previously informed that SRC International was specifically involved in the overseas investment in strategic energy and mining sectors. How such a project worth at least hundreds of millions of ringgit, if not billions, awarded to a mid-sized local construction company in anyway related to its stated mandate?
Worse, the actual amount transferred to Putra Perdana Construction was RM197 million, of which only RM170 million was returned. The balance of the RM27 million was channelled to Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal account by Putra Perdana Construction immediately upon receipt from SRC International.
If the sums transferred were indeed for a unnamed mega-project, then why was the RM27 million not returned by Putra Perdana to SRC International but instead “given” to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak?
Hence the utterly feeble reply provided by the Minister lends credence to the view that the unnamed fictitious project was made up in order to cover up illicit transactions between SRC International and Putra Perdana.
Furthermore, in the Finance Minister’s reply, he said based on Malaysian parliamentary rules, he did not need to respond to allegations on the RM27 million, which was based on a news report.
"SRC does not have any information with regards to the issue on the money that was channelled to the bank account of Finance Minister, and this was based on news report from a portal, (in) which the source of the news was unverified. In view of this, under the Standing Order 23(1)(i), the matter need not be answered, as it is one to seek clarification over a news report," Dato’ Seri Najib said.
The failure to provide an answer to the RM27 million is completely unacceptable because the information was not “based on a news report”, but instead based on a chart openly displayed by the Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali during a press conference. The Finance Minister’s refusal to answer a perfectly valid question arising from information provided by the Attorney-General himself demonstrates an utter contempt the Minister has for the Parliament.
The only way for the Prime Minister to be absolved of the alleged crimes is to come clean with all the necessary evidence to be judge by all Malaysians.
However, the failure by the Prime Minister to shed light on the matter goes to only to strengthen the suspicions and belief of ordinary Malaysians that tax-payers money has been illicitly transferred from state-owned entities to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal account.
Wednesday, March 09, 2016
The AG and IGP must expedite investigations on 1MDB's US$6.5 billion bond deals with Goldman Sachs
Bloomberg has reported yesterday that the former Chief of Goldman Sach’ s Southeast Asian operations, Tim Leissner has been subpoenaed by the Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) of the United States last month.
Prosecutors in the Justice Department’ s kleptocracy asset-recovery unit are investigating whether funds were embezzled from 1Malaysia Development Bhd., known as 1MDB, by politically connected people in Malaysia, the people said. The FBI’ s New York office is leading the investigation and is trying to determine if any U.S. laws were broken, according to one of the people briefed on the subpoena issued to Leissner.
Critics of the 1MDB mega-scandal, including myself, have long been calling for the bond issuance exercise carried out by Goldman Sachs for 1MDB to raise a total of US$6.5 billion to be investigated.
1MDB had via 3 international bond issuance exercise, raised US$1.75 billion, US$1.75 billion and US$3 billion in May 2012, October 2012 and March 2013 respectively. The investment bank which also acted as the underwriter of the bonds was Goldman Sachs.
The above bond issuance stunk to high heavens because of the abnormal and exorbitant “certain commissions, fees and expenses” which were paid to Goldman.
For example, 1MDB paid US$196 million and US$283 million for the “certain commissions, fees and expenses” to raise US$1.75 billion and US$3 billion respectively. These amounts worked out to a staggering 11.2% and 9.4% of the funds raised.
How is it that Tenaga Nasional and Penerbangan Malaysia Bhd were able to raise US$350 million and US$1 billion by paying only 2% and 0.5% in fees and expenses?
What is more interesting is the fact that other Goldman Sachs fund-raising exercises were substantially cheaper as well. For example, Goldman charged Sarawak government subsidiary, Equisar International Inc only 1.3% in fees.
For similarly-sized issues, the Mexican and Uruguayan governments successfully issued bonds amounting to US$3.9 billion and US$2.0 billion by deducting only 0.2% and 0.1% for fees and expenses respectively.
How could it be possible that Malaysia as a country is 100 times less credit worthy than the Uruguayan government?
Questions asked previously have not been answered in full and Malaysians have remained in the dark. Goldman Sachs insisted that other than fees paid to the professional legal advisors and accountants, the entire fees were due to the investment bank.
1MDB and the Minister of Finance however, contradicted Goldman Sachs by telling the Malaysian parliament that part of the ‘ fees’ to Goldman was actually a discount given to bond subscribers. They however, refused to disclose the “discount” which was given and the investors who subscribed to the bond.
Despite the fact that the Malaysian government and taxpayers are the biggest victims to the astronomical fee paid to Goldman Sachs, it is the US investigators who have found basis to investigate the above transactions for possible scam, conspiracy and international money laundering.
It is a disgrace that the Royal Malaysian Police has completely failed to carry any extensive investigations on the above incredulous transactions. The Attorney-General and the Inspector General of Police must expedite investigations on 1MDB’ s US$6.5 billion bond deals with Goldman Sachs in the light of Tim Leissner being subpoenaed by the FBI.
The failure of the Attorney-General and the Inspector General Police to take quick and effective action against such crimes have led to the Government carrying out a multi-billion bailout of 1MDB with emergency loans, cheap land sales and preferred contracts at the expense of the tax-payers.
Prosecutors in the Justice Department’ s kleptocracy asset-recovery unit are investigating whether funds were embezzled from 1Malaysia Development Bhd., known as 1MDB, by politically connected people in Malaysia, the people said. The FBI’ s New York office is leading the investigation and is trying to determine if any U.S. laws were broken, according to one of the people briefed on the subpoena issued to Leissner.
Critics of the 1MDB mega-scandal, including myself, have long been calling for the bond issuance exercise carried out by Goldman Sachs for 1MDB to raise a total of US$6.5 billion to be investigated.
1MDB had via 3 international bond issuance exercise, raised US$1.75 billion, US$1.75 billion and US$3 billion in May 2012, October 2012 and March 2013 respectively. The investment bank which also acted as the underwriter of the bonds was Goldman Sachs.
The above bond issuance stunk to high heavens because of the abnormal and exorbitant “certain commissions, fees and expenses” which were paid to Goldman.
For example, 1MDB paid US$196 million and US$283 million for the “certain commissions, fees and expenses” to raise US$1.75 billion and US$3 billion respectively. These amounts worked out to a staggering 11.2% and 9.4% of the funds raised.
How is it that Tenaga Nasional and Penerbangan Malaysia Bhd were able to raise US$350 million and US$1 billion by paying only 2% and 0.5% in fees and expenses?
What is more interesting is the fact that other Goldman Sachs fund-raising exercises were substantially cheaper as well. For example, Goldman charged Sarawak government subsidiary, Equisar International Inc only 1.3% in fees.
For similarly-sized issues, the Mexican and Uruguayan governments successfully issued bonds amounting to US$3.9 billion and US$2.0 billion by deducting only 0.2% and 0.1% for fees and expenses respectively.
How could it be possible that Malaysia as a country is 100 times less credit worthy than the Uruguayan government?
Questions asked previously have not been answered in full and Malaysians have remained in the dark. Goldman Sachs insisted that other than fees paid to the professional legal advisors and accountants, the entire fees were due to the investment bank.
1MDB and the Minister of Finance however, contradicted Goldman Sachs by telling the Malaysian parliament that part of the ‘ fees’ to Goldman was actually a discount given to bond subscribers. They however, refused to disclose the “discount” which was given and the investors who subscribed to the bond.
Despite the fact that the Malaysian government and taxpayers are the biggest victims to the astronomical fee paid to Goldman Sachs, it is the US investigators who have found basis to investigate the above transactions for possible scam, conspiracy and international money laundering.
It is a disgrace that the Royal Malaysian Police has completely failed to carry any extensive investigations on the above incredulous transactions. The Attorney-General and the Inspector General of Police must expedite investigations on 1MDB’ s US$6.5 billion bond deals with Goldman Sachs in the light of Tim Leissner being subpoenaed by the FBI.
The failure of the Attorney-General and the Inspector General Police to take quick and effective action against such crimes have led to the Government carrying out a multi-billion bailout of 1MDB with emergency loans, cheap land sales and preferred contracts at the expense of the tax-payers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)