I have asked the Minister of Finance to state the current value of remaining investment ‘units’ owned by 1MDB subsidiary Brazen Sky Limited and to name the bank or financial institution that was the ‘custodian’ of those investment ‘units’.
Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan baki nilai terkini pelaburan ‘unit’ yang dimiliki oleh anak syarikat 1MDB, Brazen Sky Limited dan nama institusi bank atau kewangan yang kini menjadi ‘custodian’ kepada pelaburan tersebut.
This question was rejected by the Speaker during the last sitting in July with the utterly ridiculous excuse that it was “buah fikiran” or basically a figment of my imagination. I’m grateful that the second attempt at posing this question to the Finance Minister has been accepted.
However, my joy was shortlived. I’ve received the reply dated 30 October 2017 from the Minister of Finance yesterday (attached). It was the stupidest “pretend to be stupid” reply I have ever received from any Minister in my 9 and the half years in Parliament.
My question asked what is the current value of “units” and who is the custodian bank. The reply start with “rancangan 1MDB untuk menyelesaikan hutang syarikat adalah seperti berikut…” or “the plan to resolve 1MDB’s debts are as follows”.
And the Minister goes on to tell the story of how selling the Edra Energy, 1MDB’s real estate properties and the investment ‘units’ will pay for the 1MDB debts. He might as well have added that the sun rises from the east and sets in the west.
The Minister’s answer could have been less than 10 words, and it would have answered my question perfectly. Value of units, and name of bank.
Is the Finance Minister that stupid that he could not understand simple English or Malay? Or he is trying his best to pretend to be a complete nitwit so that he doesn’t have to answer a very simple question from a Member of Parliament? Either way, the Finance Minister has show utter contempt for the Parliament.
Malaysians have the right to know the status of USD940 million worth of investment ‘units’ held by Brazen Sky Ltd. It’s not like the question has never been answered in Parliament before.
Current and former finance ministers, as well as 1MDB, itself had openly stated that the company had investments in the form of ‘units’ held with a ‘custodian bank’ previously valued at US$2.3 billion, of which a substantial portion has apparently been redeemed.
1MDB has in April this year, further emphasized that the investment ‘units’ would be “monetized” to repay Abu Dhabi’s IPIC the sum of US$1.2 billion. Hence, it is an extremely valid question to ask what is the current value of these units which are previously held in BSI Bank, Singapore.
However, more than a year after BSI lost its license in Singapore, and we are still looking for the same answers regarding Brazen Sky’s accounts. Who is its new ‘custodian’ bank and what is the status of its units?
Or are Malaysians to assume that the refusal of the Finance Minister to answer the above question is evidence that the ‘units’ are indeed a fraud as suspected with little or no value, and it’s current not held in any bank around the world?
Showing posts with label BSI. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BSI. Show all posts
Wednesday, November 01, 2017
Thursday, August 03, 2017
No Malaysian or international is willing to help 1MDB launder funds via the sale of fraudulent investment ‘units’ to cover up 1MDB’s debt to IPIC
1MDB has failed to meet its own self-imposed deadline to repay its debts to Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC). The first instalment of US$602,725,000 was due on 31 July as part of the settlement arrived at the London Arbitration Court between IPIC, 1MDB and the Ministry of Finance in April 2017.
Then, 1MDB had disclosed that “these obligations will be met by 1MDB, primarily via monetization of 1MDB-owned investment fund units”.
Now with the payment in default, 1MDB said that it “is awaiting funds that were due to be received in July. Due to the need for additional regulatory approvals, the receipt of those funds has been delayed to August.”
The Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak repeated the same when questioned in Parliament by the Opposition Leader, Dato’ Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, claiming that the delay in payment is merely a “technical issue” without elaborating any further.
All of the above responses are cryptic and opaque as no one after reading or listening to the above responses have any clue as to why exactly is there apparent difficulty in processing the above transactions, or what regulatory approvals are involved, in making the above payment to IPIC.
The reason for the opacity and secrecy is simple. There is no Bank in the world today who is willing to process the ‘sale’ of the 1MDB-owned investment fund ‘units’. This is because the United States Department of Justice have stated that these ‘units’ were fraudulent. They were created to cover-up the more than US$1 billion which were misappropriated by 1MDB to Good Star Limited when the intent was to have invested with Petrosaudi International Limited.
In fact, the Singapore Courts also confirmed that the financial analyst from NRA Capital in Singapore was bribed to produce the false valuation report on these investment ‘units’.
Any Bank, Malaysian or international which facilitates the transaction involving the sale of these fraudulent investment ‘units’ by 1MDB to whoever or whichever party would hence be guilty of facilitating money laundering.
BSI Bank, the Singapore branch of the 132-year-old Swiss private bank which was the ‘custodian bank’ for the above 1MDB investment had already been punished. It’s merchant banking licence was terminated by Singapore and subsequently, the Switzerland’s financial regulator, FINMA has demanded that the Bank be dissolved.
No bank worth its salt would want to experience and endure the same fate as BSI Bank or many other Banks which have been fined and punished as a result of their entanglement with 1MDB.
The only way for 1MDB to repay IPIC would be a direct payment by the Government of Malaysia to IPIC. However, if that were to happen, it would be a direct admission by the Government that 1MDB is carrying the fraudulent investment and billions of dollars have been lost and stolen from the company, which requires a further mega-bailout from the country’s coffers.
Therefore, the decision by the Speaker to deny the Member of Parliament for Segambut’s motion to debate the default by 1MDB is a clear decision to save Dato’ Seri Najib Razak the embarrassment of having the truth revealed in Parliament or worse, incriminating the Prime Minister in the largest ever financial scandal to be inflicted on Malaysia.
We call upon Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to explain himself and tell the full truth to the millions of Malaysians who are gravely concerned with the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal. If there is ‘nothing to hide’ and what we have stated above is in anyway without basis as the BN leaders often claim, then come to Parliament, answer questions and debate openly.
Then, 1MDB had disclosed that “these obligations will be met by 1MDB, primarily via monetization of 1MDB-owned investment fund units”.
Now with the payment in default, 1MDB said that it “is awaiting funds that were due to be received in July. Due to the need for additional regulatory approvals, the receipt of those funds has been delayed to August.”
The Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak repeated the same when questioned in Parliament by the Opposition Leader, Dato’ Seri Wan Azizah Wan Ismail, claiming that the delay in payment is merely a “technical issue” without elaborating any further.
All of the above responses are cryptic and opaque as no one after reading or listening to the above responses have any clue as to why exactly is there apparent difficulty in processing the above transactions, or what regulatory approvals are involved, in making the above payment to IPIC.
The reason for the opacity and secrecy is simple. There is no Bank in the world today who is willing to process the ‘sale’ of the 1MDB-owned investment fund ‘units’. This is because the United States Department of Justice have stated that these ‘units’ were fraudulent. They were created to cover-up the more than US$1 billion which were misappropriated by 1MDB to Good Star Limited when the intent was to have invested with Petrosaudi International Limited.
In fact, the Singapore Courts also confirmed that the financial analyst from NRA Capital in Singapore was bribed to produce the false valuation report on these investment ‘units’.
Any Bank, Malaysian or international which facilitates the transaction involving the sale of these fraudulent investment ‘units’ by 1MDB to whoever or whichever party would hence be guilty of facilitating money laundering.
BSI Bank, the Singapore branch of the 132-year-old Swiss private bank which was the ‘custodian bank’ for the above 1MDB investment had already been punished. It’s merchant banking licence was terminated by Singapore and subsequently, the Switzerland’s financial regulator, FINMA has demanded that the Bank be dissolved.
No bank worth its salt would want to experience and endure the same fate as BSI Bank or many other Banks which have been fined and punished as a result of their entanglement with 1MDB.
The only way for 1MDB to repay IPIC would be a direct payment by the Government of Malaysia to IPIC. However, if that were to happen, it would be a direct admission by the Government that 1MDB is carrying the fraudulent investment and billions of dollars have been lost and stolen from the company, which requires a further mega-bailout from the country’s coffers.
Therefore, the decision by the Speaker to deny the Member of Parliament for Segambut’s motion to debate the default by 1MDB is a clear decision to save Dato’ Seri Najib Razak the embarrassment of having the truth revealed in Parliament or worse, incriminating the Prime Minister in the largest ever financial scandal to be inflicted on Malaysia.
We call upon Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to explain himself and tell the full truth to the millions of Malaysians who are gravely concerned with the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal. If there is ‘nothing to hide’ and what we have stated above is in anyway without basis as the BN leaders often claim, then come to Parliament, answer questions and debate openly.
Saturday, April 22, 2017
1MDB new auditor’s biggest challenge now is to audit and verify the purported sale of 1MDB’s Brazen Sky or its assets to a “undisclosed third party”
The Singapore Straits Times reported that 1MDB is expected to ink an agreement with Abu Dhabi's International Petroleum Investment Co (IPIC) to settle a dispute involving billions of dollars very soon.
In its report, the Singapore daily cited sources as saying the agreement would see 1MDB pay IPIC US$1.2 billion by year end, to settle a loan and accumulated interest from a bailout the IPIC gave 1MDB in July 2015.
It said most of the money would come from the sale of "fund units" from 1MDB subsidiary Brazen Sky to an undisclosed buyer. Brazen Sky is of particular interest to 1MDB watchers because its account in Singapore's BSI Bank was supposed to be the account used to receive funds from 1MDB's Cayman Islands account.
If the Singapore Straits Times report is to be believed, then 1MDB’s newly appointed auditor, Parker Randall will now be faced with their biggest test to date. Parker Randall, represented locally by the Malaysian audit firm, “Afrizan Tarmili Khairul Azhar” (aftaas) must carry out the necessary due diligence and audit to ensure that the transactions taking place are bona fide and above board.
Of interest is the fact that until today, 1MDB has failed to provide any form of clarity of these “fund units” worth US$940 million purported redeemed from a Cayman Island investment fund.
1MDB has refused, despite repeated demands from the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor-General to provide financial statements and documents of 1MDB’s overseas bank accounts and assets, including that of Brazen Sky Limited.
Worse, these assets were purportedly parked in BSI Bank, Singapore which have already had its merchant banking license withdrawn by Monetary Authority of Singapore. When questioned in Parliament, the Minister of Finance responded that these units were not managed by any fund manager or investment bank, while also refusing to where the “units” have been moved to.
Hence it is critical for Parker Randall or aftaas to confirm the existence and authenticity of the US$940 million worth of “units”. Most interestingly, despite the fluctuating value of investment assets over time, these fund units appeared to have a frozen value of US$940 million since its redemption in January 2015.
In addition, should Brazen Sky or its assets be sold, Parker Randall must verify that the sale and purchase transaction is a genuine transaction and not another case of paper shuffling which have taken place earlier in 1MDB’s US$1.8 billion investment in Petrosaudi.
It is also important for Parker Randall to confirm and satisfy itself on the identity of the mysterious “undisclosed buyer” of these mysterious Brazen Sky assets as part of its audit verification. The auditors must also trace the money trail of the fund transfers from the mysterious undisclosed buyer into 1MDB before being transferred to IPIC.
The audit is all the more important given the spotlight 1MDB has, which has caused some half a dozen of banks around the world to be shutdown or penalised for facilitating money laundering transactions.
Surely, after Deloitte Malaysia disgracefully resigned from 1MDB for failing to detect any of the above illicit and money laundering activities, Parker Randall do not want to follow the same footsteps and sully its international reputation.
In its report, the Singapore daily cited sources as saying the agreement would see 1MDB pay IPIC US$1.2 billion by year end, to settle a loan and accumulated interest from a bailout the IPIC gave 1MDB in July 2015.
It said most of the money would come from the sale of "fund units" from 1MDB subsidiary Brazen Sky to an undisclosed buyer. Brazen Sky is of particular interest to 1MDB watchers because its account in Singapore's BSI Bank was supposed to be the account used to receive funds from 1MDB's Cayman Islands account.
If the Singapore Straits Times report is to be believed, then 1MDB’s newly appointed auditor, Parker Randall will now be faced with their biggest test to date. Parker Randall, represented locally by the Malaysian audit firm, “Afrizan Tarmili Khairul Azhar” (aftaas) must carry out the necessary due diligence and audit to ensure that the transactions taking place are bona fide and above board.
Of interest is the fact that until today, 1MDB has failed to provide any form of clarity of these “fund units” worth US$940 million purported redeemed from a Cayman Island investment fund.
1MDB has refused, despite repeated demands from the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor-General to provide financial statements and documents of 1MDB’s overseas bank accounts and assets, including that of Brazen Sky Limited.
Worse, these assets were purportedly parked in BSI Bank, Singapore which have already had its merchant banking license withdrawn by Monetary Authority of Singapore. When questioned in Parliament, the Minister of Finance responded that these units were not managed by any fund manager or investment bank, while also refusing to where the “units” have been moved to.
Hence it is critical for Parker Randall or aftaas to confirm the existence and authenticity of the US$940 million worth of “units”. Most interestingly, despite the fluctuating value of investment assets over time, these fund units appeared to have a frozen value of US$940 million since its redemption in January 2015.
In addition, should Brazen Sky or its assets be sold, Parker Randall must verify that the sale and purchase transaction is a genuine transaction and not another case of paper shuffling which have taken place earlier in 1MDB’s US$1.8 billion investment in Petrosaudi.
It is also important for Parker Randall to confirm and satisfy itself on the identity of the mysterious “undisclosed buyer” of these mysterious Brazen Sky assets as part of its audit verification. The auditors must also trace the money trail of the fund transfers from the mysterious undisclosed buyer into 1MDB before being transferred to IPIC.
The audit is all the more important given the spotlight 1MDB has, which has caused some half a dozen of banks around the world to be shutdown or penalised for facilitating money laundering transactions.
Surely, after Deloitte Malaysia disgracefully resigned from 1MDB for failing to detect any of the above illicit and money laundering activities, Parker Randall do not want to follow the same footsteps and sully its international reputation.
Monday, November 14, 2016
Bank Negara’s inaction and reticence, in stark contrast with Singaporean authorities' actions to protect the integrity of their banking system, abets the indictment of Malaysia as a global kleptocracy
I had on 31 October asked the Minister of Finance to state the actions taken by Bank Negara over the conduct of Ambank bankers, Joanne Yu and Cheah Tek Kuang for covering up money laundering transactions relating to the 1MDB.
The question was raised because The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) had on 6 September 2016 made very specific allegations against Ambank Malaysia and its officials of facilitating and abetting money-laundering when billions of ringgit was transferred into the bank accounts of Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
In making the allegations, the prestigious financial paper substantiated the claims with private conversations between senior Ambank officials with Low Taek Jho, who was carrying out the transactions on behalf of the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister had given Low access to his accounts, according to investigative documents sighted by WSJ. His primary contact at AmBank was Joanna Yu, the banker he had warned via BlackBerry to communicate discreetly. Cheah Tek Kuang, a senior AmBank executive and adviser to the bank’s chairman, handled the account personally, the BlackBerry messages indicate.
According to WSJ, Low sent hampers of food to Yu and lunched with her at noodle shops, according to the phone messages. He kept reinforcing the need for secrecy: “v v important no one should know in ambank besides u or cheah or get hold of statement,” one message said. “Cause if it gets on internet where funds were from then headache.”
Yu even made recommendations on which US correspondent bank – Wells Fargo or JP Morgan will raise less questions involving the transfers.
These messages clearly indicated a conspiracy by the above parties to at best, hide the transactions from scrutiny, and at worst, blatant masking of the illicit transactions as legitimate ones.
In his written reply, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak appeared to confirm the above allegations when he said that “Bank Negara has undertaken investigations on financial institutions relating to 1MDB under Financial Services Act 2013, Islamic Financial Services Act 2013, and Anti Money Laundering Act 2001… Based on the investigation results, enforcement actions have been duly executed by Bank Negara with the power provided to it under the law.”
However, we were never informed of what actions have been taken against Ambank or the bankers who have facilitated these illicit transactions. In fact, as far as we are aware, both Joanne Yu and Cheah Tek Kuang are free men.
Cheah Tek Kuang who was the Group Managing Director of Ambank until his retirement in 2012 remains an advisor to the Chairman’s Office the Bank according to publicly available records. He is also the Chairman of Berjaya Sports Toto and an Independent Director at IOI Group.
If Bank Negara has indeed taken action against him for abetting money laundering offences, can he still be Chairman and Director of publicly listed companies?
Bank Negara’s absence of any visible actions against Banks and its officers who were complicit in money laundering offences is in stark contrast with the actions taken by the Singapore authorities to defend the integrity of their banking system.
Former private banker Yak Yew Chee, who dealt with Jho Low and 1MDB has been jailed 18 weeks and fined S$24,000 for forging reference letters vouching for the Low family and for failing to report suspicious transactions involving tens of millions of dollars coursing through BSI bank in Singapore. Yak will also surrender S$7.5 million to the State “to demonstrate his genuine contrition”.
Another former private banker with the Swiss BSI Bank, Yeo Jiawei is currently on trial over four charges for perverting the course of justice and another seven counts for money laundering, cheating and forgery over the same Jho Low and 1MDB-related scandal.
Unfortunately, the new Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia, Datuk Muhammad Ibrahim’s silence and reticence in tackling the above money laundering scandal will only serve to enhance Malaysia’s reputation as global kleptocracy.
The question was raised because The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) had on 6 September 2016 made very specific allegations against Ambank Malaysia and its officials of facilitating and abetting money-laundering when billions of ringgit was transferred into the bank accounts of Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
In making the allegations, the prestigious financial paper substantiated the claims with private conversations between senior Ambank officials with Low Taek Jho, who was carrying out the transactions on behalf of the Prime Minister.
The Prime Minister had given Low access to his accounts, according to investigative documents sighted by WSJ. His primary contact at AmBank was Joanna Yu, the banker he had warned via BlackBerry to communicate discreetly. Cheah Tek Kuang, a senior AmBank executive and adviser to the bank’s chairman, handled the account personally, the BlackBerry messages indicate.
According to WSJ, Low sent hampers of food to Yu and lunched with her at noodle shops, according to the phone messages. He kept reinforcing the need for secrecy: “v v important no one should know in ambank besides u or cheah or get hold of statement,” one message said. “Cause if it gets on internet where funds were from then headache.”
Yu even made recommendations on which US correspondent bank – Wells Fargo or JP Morgan will raise less questions involving the transfers.
These messages clearly indicated a conspiracy by the above parties to at best, hide the transactions from scrutiny, and at worst, blatant masking of the illicit transactions as legitimate ones.
In his written reply, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak appeared to confirm the above allegations when he said that “Bank Negara has undertaken investigations on financial institutions relating to 1MDB under Financial Services Act 2013, Islamic Financial Services Act 2013, and Anti Money Laundering Act 2001… Based on the investigation results, enforcement actions have been duly executed by Bank Negara with the power provided to it under the law.”
However, we were never informed of what actions have been taken against Ambank or the bankers who have facilitated these illicit transactions. In fact, as far as we are aware, both Joanne Yu and Cheah Tek Kuang are free men.
Cheah Tek Kuang who was the Group Managing Director of Ambank until his retirement in 2012 remains an advisor to the Chairman’s Office the Bank according to publicly available records. He is also the Chairman of Berjaya Sports Toto and an Independent Director at IOI Group.
If Bank Negara has indeed taken action against him for abetting money laundering offences, can he still be Chairman and Director of publicly listed companies?
Bank Negara’s absence of any visible actions against Banks and its officers who were complicit in money laundering offences is in stark contrast with the actions taken by the Singapore authorities to defend the integrity of their banking system.
Former private banker Yak Yew Chee, who dealt with Jho Low and 1MDB has been jailed 18 weeks and fined S$24,000 for forging reference letters vouching for the Low family and for failing to report suspicious transactions involving tens of millions of dollars coursing through BSI bank in Singapore. Yak will also surrender S$7.5 million to the State “to demonstrate his genuine contrition”.
Another former private banker with the Swiss BSI Bank, Yeo Jiawei is currently on trial over four charges for perverting the course of justice and another seven counts for money laundering, cheating and forgery over the same Jho Low and 1MDB-related scandal.
Unfortunately, the new Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia, Datuk Muhammad Ibrahim’s silence and reticence in tackling the above money laundering scandal will only serve to enhance Malaysia’s reputation as global kleptocracy.
Tuesday, October 25, 2016
Apa sebabnya Menteri Kewangan merahsiakan pengurus dana dan bank kustodian bagi pelaburan “unit” yang dikatakan bernilai US$940 juta?
Laporan Ketua Audit Negara dan Laporan Jawatankuasa Kira-kira Wang Negara yang dibentangkan di Dewan Rakyat pada bulan April yang lalu telah menyatakan bahawa nilai dan aset sejumlah US$7 bilion (RM28 bilion) tidak dapat dikesan atau disahkan.
Antaranya ialah pelaburan “unit” bernilai US$940 juta yang pada masa itu disimpan dalam bank kustodian, BSI Bank di Singapura. Ketua Audit Negara tidak dapat mengesahkan kewujudan dan nilai semasa pelaburan tersebut sebab 1MDB telah gagal menyerahkan sebarang dokumen daripada BSI Bank kepadanya walaupun dokumen telah diminta selama setahun.
Aset “unit” yang dikatakan bernilai US$940 juta ini merupakan baki aset yang ditebus daripada pengurus dana di Cayman Islands pada bulan January 2015.
Sehingga hari ini, “unit” yang disimpan di BSI Bank ini merupakan misteri sebab kalau 1MDB begitu terdesak kekurangan aliran tunai, sehingga terpaksa menjual aset-aset penting negara seperti penjanakuasa bebas dan hartanah emas seperti Bandar Malaysia kepada pelabur asing, kenapa pelaburan “unit” ini tidak dijualkan dahulu untuk membiayai hutang gergasi 1MDB?
Keengganan 1MDB untuk menyampaikan sebarang matlumat dan dokumen kepada Ketua Audit Negara, dan keputusan Deloitte Malaysia untuk menarik balik pengakuan kepada audit 1MDB bagi tahun 2013 dan 2014 mengemukakan keraguan besar terhadap kewujudan “unit” yang dipegang dalam BSI Bank tersebut.
Kini, lesen perbankan BSI Bank telah dibatalkan oleh kerajaan Singapura kerana didapati bersalah dari segi pengubahan wang haram yang berkaitan dengan skandal 1MDB. Saya telah bertanya kepada Menteri Kewangan, apa telah terjadi kepada “unit” tersebut.
Inilah jawapan yang saya telah terima daripada YB Menteri Kewangan pada Hari Khamis yang lalu. Beliau menyebut bahawa “Ahli Lembaga Pengarah Brazen Sky Limited mengesahkan bahawa sebuah bank berlesen antarabangsa telah diberi mandate sebagai custodian bank untuk mengambilalih peranan BSI Bank, Singapura. Ahli Lembaga Pengarah Brazen Sky Limited juga telah melaporkan bahawa tiada perubahan status di dalam nilai pelaburan tersebut.”
Ini merupakan jawapan yang cukup tidak bertanggungjawab daripada Menteri Kewangan.
Pertama sekali, kenapa Menteri tak sebut, siapakah pengurus dana dan custodian bank yang baru? Apakah kerahsiaan yang diperlukan sehingga nama tidak boleh dimaklumkan kepada Dewan Rakyat?
Dulu bila Menteri Kewangan ditanya siapa pengurus dana pelaburan 1MDB di Cayman Islands, Menteri Kewangan sama-sama enggan menamakan nama pengurus dana walaupun beliau menegaskan bahawa ia dilaburkan dalam sebuah syarikat kewangan yang berlesen.
Kini, kita faham kenapa Menteri enggan menamakan syarikat. Ini adalah kerana syarikat pengurus dana pada masa 1MDB membuat pelaburan telah didapati oleh Ketua Audit Negara bahawa syarikat itu tanpa lesen.
Adakah keengganan Menteri Kewangan untuk menamakan pengurusan dana “unit” ini adalah kerana ia juga tidak berlesen seperti syarikat di Cayman Islands yang dulu?
Adakah Menteri Kewangan takut bahawa kalau dinamakan, bank kustodian yang baru ini juga akan dibatalkan lesen perbankan seperti apa yang terjadi kepada BSI Bank Singapura?
Kedua, jawapan Menteri Kewangan tidak boleh diterima kerana beliau bertanggungjawab untuk memastikan kesahihan segala jawapan yang diberikan oleh syarikat yang dikawalnya. Menteri Kewangan tak boleh jawab bahawa Ahli Lembaga Pengarah berkata bahawa apa-apa. Menteri Kewangan kena pasti bahawa nilai “unit” itu benar-benar bernilai US$940 juta!
It is not right for the Finance Minister to try to protect himself with deniability.
Adalah jelas bahawa kesemua kekurangan keterbukaan dalam jawapan Menteri Kewangan ini menunjukkan bahawa adanya udang disebalik batu yang disembunyikan daripada rakyat Malaysia.
Antaranya ialah pelaburan “unit” bernilai US$940 juta yang pada masa itu disimpan dalam bank kustodian, BSI Bank di Singapura. Ketua Audit Negara tidak dapat mengesahkan kewujudan dan nilai semasa pelaburan tersebut sebab 1MDB telah gagal menyerahkan sebarang dokumen daripada BSI Bank kepadanya walaupun dokumen telah diminta selama setahun.
Aset “unit” yang dikatakan bernilai US$940 juta ini merupakan baki aset yang ditebus daripada pengurus dana di Cayman Islands pada bulan January 2015.
Sehingga hari ini, “unit” yang disimpan di BSI Bank ini merupakan misteri sebab kalau 1MDB begitu terdesak kekurangan aliran tunai, sehingga terpaksa menjual aset-aset penting negara seperti penjanakuasa bebas dan hartanah emas seperti Bandar Malaysia kepada pelabur asing, kenapa pelaburan “unit” ini tidak dijualkan dahulu untuk membiayai hutang gergasi 1MDB?
Keengganan 1MDB untuk menyampaikan sebarang matlumat dan dokumen kepada Ketua Audit Negara, dan keputusan Deloitte Malaysia untuk menarik balik pengakuan kepada audit 1MDB bagi tahun 2013 dan 2014 mengemukakan keraguan besar terhadap kewujudan “unit” yang dipegang dalam BSI Bank tersebut.
Kini, lesen perbankan BSI Bank telah dibatalkan oleh kerajaan Singapura kerana didapati bersalah dari segi pengubahan wang haram yang berkaitan dengan skandal 1MDB. Saya telah bertanya kepada Menteri Kewangan, apa telah terjadi kepada “unit” tersebut.
Inilah jawapan yang saya telah terima daripada YB Menteri Kewangan pada Hari Khamis yang lalu. Beliau menyebut bahawa “Ahli Lembaga Pengarah Brazen Sky Limited mengesahkan bahawa sebuah bank berlesen antarabangsa telah diberi mandate sebagai custodian bank untuk mengambilalih peranan BSI Bank, Singapura. Ahli Lembaga Pengarah Brazen Sky Limited juga telah melaporkan bahawa tiada perubahan status di dalam nilai pelaburan tersebut.”
Ini merupakan jawapan yang cukup tidak bertanggungjawab daripada Menteri Kewangan.
Pertama sekali, kenapa Menteri tak sebut, siapakah pengurus dana dan custodian bank yang baru? Apakah kerahsiaan yang diperlukan sehingga nama tidak boleh dimaklumkan kepada Dewan Rakyat?
Dulu bila Menteri Kewangan ditanya siapa pengurus dana pelaburan 1MDB di Cayman Islands, Menteri Kewangan sama-sama enggan menamakan nama pengurus dana walaupun beliau menegaskan bahawa ia dilaburkan dalam sebuah syarikat kewangan yang berlesen.
Kini, kita faham kenapa Menteri enggan menamakan syarikat. Ini adalah kerana syarikat pengurus dana pada masa 1MDB membuat pelaburan telah didapati oleh Ketua Audit Negara bahawa syarikat itu tanpa lesen.
Adakah keengganan Menteri Kewangan untuk menamakan pengurusan dana “unit” ini adalah kerana ia juga tidak berlesen seperti syarikat di Cayman Islands yang dulu?
Adakah Menteri Kewangan takut bahawa kalau dinamakan, bank kustodian yang baru ini juga akan dibatalkan lesen perbankan seperti apa yang terjadi kepada BSI Bank Singapura?
Kedua, jawapan Menteri Kewangan tidak boleh diterima kerana beliau bertanggungjawab untuk memastikan kesahihan segala jawapan yang diberikan oleh syarikat yang dikawalnya. Menteri Kewangan tak boleh jawab bahawa Ahli Lembaga Pengarah berkata bahawa apa-apa. Menteri Kewangan kena pasti bahawa nilai “unit” itu benar-benar bernilai US$940 juta!
It is not right for the Finance Minister to try to protect himself with deniability.
Adalah jelas bahawa kesemua kekurangan keterbukaan dalam jawapan Menteri Kewangan ini menunjukkan bahawa adanya udang disebalik batu yang disembunyikan daripada rakyat Malaysia.
Tuesday, May 24, 2016
BSI Bank directed to shut down in Singapore due to offences linked to 1MDB, but what will happen to the purported US$940 million worth of "units" parked there?
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s brainchild, 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) continued its giant-slaying run after it directly caused the collapse of BSI Bank.
Switzerland's Office of the Attorney General (OAG) has commenced criminal proceedings against BSI SA Bank for allegedly failing to prevent offences linked to 1MDB.
"The criminal proceedings opened on May 23 against BSI SA are based on information revealed by the criminal proceedings related to 1MDB and on issues raised in the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (Finma) of May 23. The information suggests that the offences of money laundering and bribery of foreign public officials currently under investigation in the context of the 1MDB case could have been prevented had BSI SA been adequately organised," it said.
Simultaneously, the Monetary Authority of Singapore shut down BSI Bank operations in the island-state. The grounds provided include "serious breaches of anti-money laundering requirements, poor management oversight of the bank's operations and gross misconduct by some of the bank's staff".
This is perhaps 1MDB’s most notable achievement to date because such action has not been taken by the Singapore authorities in the last 32 years.
It is unfortunate that while foreign regulatory authorities are taking stern and punitive actions against individuals, organisations and financial institutions to protect the integrity and reputation of their financial systems and the rule of law, the corresponding Malaysian institutions are trying their best skirt around the massive crime against the state.
While Bank Negara Malaysia was deemed the most “aggressive” institution to investigate and penalise 1MDB and the banks under its purview, at the end of the day 1MDB was barely slapped on the wrist with a compound of an undisclosed sum. The crooks behind the multi-billion dollar scandal were perhaps properly tickled.
The closure of BSI Bank, Singapore however, piled additional pressure on 1MDB to prove its holdings in the Bank. 1MDB President Arul Kanda has testified to the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in January this year that US$940 million (RM3.8 billion) worth of mysterious “units” remained safely parked in BSI Bank, Singapore.
With the closure of the Bank, will these assets evaporate together with the Bank?
Otherwise, 1MDB must now “move” this purported “units” to another financial institution. We call upon 1MDB and the Minister of Finance, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to explain the steps which will be taken to withdraw the US$940 million worth of assets from BSI Bank and which Bank will they move these assets to.
Better still, 1MDB should liquidate and repatriate the entire sum back to Malaysia to fund its local projects in Bandar Malaysia and Tun Razak Exchange which are in desperate need for financial support.
It should be noted that despite repeated requests by both the Auditor-General and the PAC, 1MDB has adamantly refused to provide bank statements and supporting documents in relation to the above US$940 million of “units” to justify its existence and worth. The US$940 million forms part of the US$7 billion worth of cash, assets and transactions which could not be verified by the Auditor-General.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and Arul Kanda both fail to explain what will happen to the RM940 million “units” from BSI Bank. If not, they have been caught with their pants down lying outright to the Parliament and to the Malaysian public once again. Malaysians can hence safely conclude that the RM940 million of “units” never existed and the monies have been lost or stolen by the powers that be.
Switzerland's Office of the Attorney General (OAG) has commenced criminal proceedings against BSI SA Bank for allegedly failing to prevent offences linked to 1MDB.
"The criminal proceedings opened on May 23 against BSI SA are based on information revealed by the criminal proceedings related to 1MDB and on issues raised in the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (Finma) of May 23. The information suggests that the offences of money laundering and bribery of foreign public officials currently under investigation in the context of the 1MDB case could have been prevented had BSI SA been adequately organised," it said.
Simultaneously, the Monetary Authority of Singapore shut down BSI Bank operations in the island-state. The grounds provided include "serious breaches of anti-money laundering requirements, poor management oversight of the bank's operations and gross misconduct by some of the bank's staff".
This is perhaps 1MDB’s most notable achievement to date because such action has not been taken by the Singapore authorities in the last 32 years.
It is unfortunate that while foreign regulatory authorities are taking stern and punitive actions against individuals, organisations and financial institutions to protect the integrity and reputation of their financial systems and the rule of law, the corresponding Malaysian institutions are trying their best skirt around the massive crime against the state.
While Bank Negara Malaysia was deemed the most “aggressive” institution to investigate and penalise 1MDB and the banks under its purview, at the end of the day 1MDB was barely slapped on the wrist with a compound of an undisclosed sum. The crooks behind the multi-billion dollar scandal were perhaps properly tickled.
The closure of BSI Bank, Singapore however, piled additional pressure on 1MDB to prove its holdings in the Bank. 1MDB President Arul Kanda has testified to the Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) in January this year that US$940 million (RM3.8 billion) worth of mysterious “units” remained safely parked in BSI Bank, Singapore.
With the closure of the Bank, will these assets evaporate together with the Bank?
Otherwise, 1MDB must now “move” this purported “units” to another financial institution. We call upon 1MDB and the Minister of Finance, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak to explain the steps which will be taken to withdraw the US$940 million worth of assets from BSI Bank and which Bank will they move these assets to.
Better still, 1MDB should liquidate and repatriate the entire sum back to Malaysia to fund its local projects in Bandar Malaysia and Tun Razak Exchange which are in desperate need for financial support.
It should be noted that despite repeated requests by both the Auditor-General and the PAC, 1MDB has adamantly refused to provide bank statements and supporting documents in relation to the above US$940 million of “units” to justify its existence and worth. The US$940 million forms part of the US$7 billion worth of cash, assets and transactions which could not be verified by the Auditor-General.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and Arul Kanda both fail to explain what will happen to the RM940 million “units” from BSI Bank. If not, they have been caught with their pants down lying outright to the Parliament and to the Malaysian public once again. Malaysians can hence safely conclude that the RM940 million of “units” never existed and the monies have been lost or stolen by the powers that be.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)