The Edge reported yesterday of the Ministry of Finance’s takeover of the 106-storey 106 Exchange Tower through the company MKD Signature. The 3.42 acres of land for the project was previously acquired by Indonesian conglomerate, Mulia Group for the sum of RM665 million.
The 106-storey Exchange Tower was initially proof of 1MDB’s success with the TRX project as it was a wholly-owned foreign investment by Indonesia’s Mulia Group. However, news of the transfer of a majority stake ‘back’ to the Malaysian Government goes to prove that there is something extremely fishy going on.
Why is it even necessary for the Government to use tax-payers’ funds to get involved in another mega-property project? Didn’t the Second Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani announced a Cabinet decision to freeze all high-end commercial and residential projects? Why is the Ministry of Finance participating in the aggravation of the property glut in the country?
More importantly, if Mulia Group had paid RM665 million for the land, the question is how much did the Ministry of Finance pay to acquire the 51% stake in the project?
The complete lack of transparency over the deal which would involve hundreds of millions of ringgit, possibly to the tune of billions, raises suspicions that it is really another one of the series of continued bailout of the debt-stricken 1MDB.
Was there for example, a secret ‘put option’ in the sale and purchase agreement between the Mulia Group and 1MDB, where the latter is obliged to buy back a majority stake from Mulia Group with a higher price at a later date? And because 1MDB obviously has no money to buy back the stake from Melia Group, was the Ministry of Finance was forced to step in to bailout 1MDB?
It should also be noted that this would be the second tract of 1MDB's TRX land that has been bought by MOF companies. It was previously disclosed in Parliament that MOF-owned company Aroma Teraju had purchased another tract of land at the Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) development in 2015.
Last year, I had asked several times in Parliament for the land area and purchase price of the land by Aroma Teraju. However my question was repeatly shot down because of the purported confidentiality clause in the purchase agreement was with two companies wholly-owned by MOF.
Why hide behind the veil of secrecy when the parties involved are entirely owned by the Government? Is it because the Ministry of Finance will look utterly stupid for buying back tiny parcels of land back from 1MDB at sums astronomically higher than the RM230 million paid by 1MDB to acquire the 70 acres from the Government?
We call on MOF and 1MDB to confirm and disclose the details of the purchases of the land in TRX above. As wholly-owned companies under the Government, the public deserves to know what is being done with their own money.
Showing posts with label Parliament. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Parliament. Show all posts
Monday, January 08, 2018
Saturday, December 23, 2017
Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin must defend Parliament's honour and dignity by reprimanding the Election Commission for treating the highest legislative institution of the land with utter contempt
During the objection hearings to the new voters being transferred to Segamat’s still unbuilt army camp, an Election Commission (EC) registrar had rejected the Parliament Hansard as evidence saying that it “cannot be believed”.
The objections are being raised in regards to the inclusion of 1079 new army voters in the Segamat constituency as list in the EC’s third quarter supplementary electoral roll. The ongoing issue had been raised by Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong because the new army camp in Segamat is not even complete but the army personnel and their spouses have already been added to the electoral roll in that constituency.
During the Budget debate in Parliament on November 27, Seremban MP Anthony Loke had asked for confirmation if the army camp was still under construction or if it had been completed.
In response the Deputy Minister of Defence, Datuk Johari Baharum said that the camp was still under construction and when question further, said that the camp was not complete. As recorded on page 136 of the Hansard, the Deputy Minister said “belum siap” when asked to confirm the status of the army camp.
Yet, the registrar chose to reject the Hansard as evidence. This is a clear case of contempt against the Parliament.
The Parliament Hansard is the official record of Parliamentary proceedings. Even in court, Parliamentary proceedings are admissible as evidence. Section 78 (1b) of the Evidence Act 1950, which states the proof required for official documents, states that
The Act clearly says that Parliamentary proceedings are proved by the minutes of the session, which takes the form of the Parliamentary Hansard and nothing else.
If the judiciary accepts the Hansard as hard evidence, who is the EC to reject the official Parliamentary document? For the EC registrar to say that the Hansard cannot be believed, they are saying that Parliament proceedings themselves cannot be believed.
We call upon the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin to reprimand the Election Commission for the latter’s contempt and we call upon the EC to reprimand the responsible Registrar above and immediately act to rectify the injustice by reopening the objection proceedings in Segamat.
The failure of the EC to do the above would only further prove that the EC is not the independent institution conceived by our Constitution. Instead, it is merely a paw of Barisan Nasional.
The objections are being raised in regards to the inclusion of 1079 new army voters in the Segamat constituency as list in the EC’s third quarter supplementary electoral roll. The ongoing issue had been raised by Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong because the new army camp in Segamat is not even complete but the army personnel and their spouses have already been added to the electoral roll in that constituency.
During the Budget debate in Parliament on November 27, Seremban MP Anthony Loke had asked for confirmation if the army camp was still under construction or if it had been completed.
In response the Deputy Minister of Defence, Datuk Johari Baharum said that the camp was still under construction and when question further, said that the camp was not complete. As recorded on page 136 of the Hansard, the Deputy Minister said “belum siap” when asked to confirm the status of the army camp.
Yet, the registrar chose to reject the Hansard as evidence. This is a clear case of contempt against the Parliament.
The Parliament Hansard is the official record of Parliamentary proceedings. Even in court, Parliamentary proceedings are admissible as evidence. Section 78 (1b) of the Evidence Act 1950, which states the proof required for official documents, states that
…the proceedings of Parliament or of any of the federal legislatures that existed in Malaysia before Parliament was constituted or of the legislature of any State— by the minutes of the body or by the published Acts of Parliament, Ordinances, Enactments or abstracts or by copies purporting to be printed by the authority of the Government concerned.
The Act clearly says that Parliamentary proceedings are proved by the minutes of the session, which takes the form of the Parliamentary Hansard and nothing else.
If the judiciary accepts the Hansard as hard evidence, who is the EC to reject the official Parliamentary document? For the EC registrar to say that the Hansard cannot be believed, they are saying that Parliament proceedings themselves cannot be believed.
We call upon the Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin to reprimand the Election Commission for the latter’s contempt and we call upon the EC to reprimand the responsible Registrar above and immediately act to rectify the injustice by reopening the objection proceedings in Segamat.
The failure of the EC to do the above would only further prove that the EC is not the independent institution conceived by our Constitution. Instead, it is merely a paw of Barisan Nasional.
Wednesday, December 13, 2017
DBKL's in-your-face defiance to Cabinet directive freezing all high-end property developments above RM1 million per unit proves that BN Government has lost total control of its limbs
Following a meeting with DBKL Mayor Tan Sri Mohamad Amin Nordin, my colleagues from Parliament revealed yesterday that DBKL would not be enacting the announced freeze on high-rise property developments above RM1 million. According to Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng, DBKL Mayor said that the ban would not be implemented in the Golden Triangle as it would infeasible.
City Hall’s response confirms two glaring flaws in the government’s ‘hare-brained’ solution to the oversupply of luxury properties in the country. Firstly, as I’ve stated before, it shows how ill-thought out and impractical the ban actually is.
Secondly and more importantly, DBKL’s defiance of a Cabinet directive demonstrates just how toothless Putrajaya’s is. Ironically the BNM report specifically highlighted that in Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley alone, the report found that office vacancy rates had increased from 20.9% in Q1 2015 to 23.6% in Q1 2017. The situation is only set to get worse with an incoming supply of additional 38 million square feet of office space.
The property freeze was first announced on November 17 by Second Finance Minister Datuk Johari Abdul Ghani following the release of Bank Negara’s (BNM) report on the severe supply and demand imbalance in the country’s property market. The freeze was supposedly a nationwide blanket ban which would freeze approvals on condominium, office and shopping mall developments valued above RM1 million per unit.
The announcement quickly became a farce when the Works Minister Datuk Fadillah Yusof contradicted his cabinet colleague by saying the ‘blanket ban’ would actually be applied on a case by case basis. The Federal Territories Minister Dato’ Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor then added that 1MDB-linked projects - Tun Razak Exchange and Bandar Malaysia would be exempted from the ban because they were ‘pre-approved’.
Finally, cabinet made a full u-turn last week when it said that developers could appeal the ban to a Ministerial committee comprising the Second Finance Minister, the Works Minister, Urban Wellbeing and Local Government Minister Tan Sri Noh Omar, and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan.
However, yesterday’s revelation by the DBKL Mayor proved that all these acrobatics are unnecessary since any decision by the Cabinet is utterly futile. If DBKL can do it, then there’s no reason why all other local councils in the country would comply with the directive.
The above further showed why we have reached such a state of severe “demand and supply imbalance” in the first place despite warnings from BNM since 2015. It is precisely because of the Cabinet’s impotence, that whatever policy that has been decided upon – good or bad, are completely diulted, if not ignored altogether like the above, by the its implementation agencies.
Beyond the major policy decisions Putrajaya needs to make to remedy the increasingly severe property sector problems which will have far-reaching consequences for our economy, there is a clear need to overhaul the Government bureaucracy to ensure policies made are carried out to the letter. Otherwise, you may have the world’s best policy-makers and the highest paid consultants, but all would be wasted with a Government effectively run by politically entrenched warlords and little Napoleons.
City Hall’s response confirms two glaring flaws in the government’s ‘hare-brained’ solution to the oversupply of luxury properties in the country. Firstly, as I’ve stated before, it shows how ill-thought out and impractical the ban actually is.
Secondly and more importantly, DBKL’s defiance of a Cabinet directive demonstrates just how toothless Putrajaya’s is. Ironically the BNM report specifically highlighted that in Kuala Lumpur and the Klang Valley alone, the report found that office vacancy rates had increased from 20.9% in Q1 2015 to 23.6% in Q1 2017. The situation is only set to get worse with an incoming supply of additional 38 million square feet of office space.
The property freeze was first announced on November 17 by Second Finance Minister Datuk Johari Abdul Ghani following the release of Bank Negara’s (BNM) report on the severe supply and demand imbalance in the country’s property market. The freeze was supposedly a nationwide blanket ban which would freeze approvals on condominium, office and shopping mall developments valued above RM1 million per unit.
The announcement quickly became a farce when the Works Minister Datuk Fadillah Yusof contradicted his cabinet colleague by saying the ‘blanket ban’ would actually be applied on a case by case basis. The Federal Territories Minister Dato’ Seri Tengku Adnan Tengku Mansor then added that 1MDB-linked projects - Tun Razak Exchange and Bandar Malaysia would be exempted from the ban because they were ‘pre-approved’.
Finally, cabinet made a full u-turn last week when it said that developers could appeal the ban to a Ministerial committee comprising the Second Finance Minister, the Works Minister, Urban Wellbeing and Local Government Minister Tan Sri Noh Omar, and Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan.
However, yesterday’s revelation by the DBKL Mayor proved that all these acrobatics are unnecessary since any decision by the Cabinet is utterly futile. If DBKL can do it, then there’s no reason why all other local councils in the country would comply with the directive.
The above further showed why we have reached such a state of severe “demand and supply imbalance” in the first place despite warnings from BNM since 2015. It is precisely because of the Cabinet’s impotence, that whatever policy that has been decided upon – good or bad, are completely diulted, if not ignored altogether like the above, by the its implementation agencies.
Beyond the major policy decisions Putrajaya needs to make to remedy the increasingly severe property sector problems which will have far-reaching consequences for our economy, there is a clear need to overhaul the Government bureaucracy to ensure policies made are carried out to the letter. Otherwise, you may have the world’s best policy-makers and the highest paid consultants, but all would be wasted with a Government effectively run by politically entrenched warlords and little Napoleons.
Thursday, November 30, 2017
Whose head should roll when East Coast Rail Link’s outrageous claims of profitability fail to materialise?
The East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) project which was awarded without any tender to China Communications and Construction Company (CCCC) has been criticised for being overly expensive at RM55 billion and potentially soaring to RM70 billion according to some reports. The government’s own consultants had estimated the cost to be only RM29 billion.
Yet despite the heavy price tag, the Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Othman Aziz told Parliament on 28 November that the project was expected to “break even from the operational aspect”, after just 8 years of operation in 2032.
The Deputy Minister’s statement is wildly ambitious on many counts.
Firstly, we have to assume that the Deputy Minister meant that “break even from the operational aspect” meant that it does not cover the enormous cost of constructing the ECRL, which is covered entirely by debt.
So far, the government has said that 85% of the project will be financed by China’s Export-Import Bank (EXIM), with a soft loan carrying an interest rate of 3.25% per annum repaid over 20 years with a 7-year moratorium. The remainder 15% will be financed via a sukuk issuance.
Therefore, the annual repayment of the ECRL borrowings will amount to an estimated whopping RM3.7 billion. This simply means that even if the ECRL is to “break even from the operational aspect” after 8 years, it will still be suffering cashflow losses of some RM3.7 billion annually!
However, even Datuk Othman Aziz’s claim of “break even from the operational aspect” is preposterous to begin with.
Datuk Othman claimed that the government was projecting a revenue of RM2.9 billion to be recorded in 2024. But this amount is more than 4 times the current revenue of KTM Berhad today!
The ridiculous revenue projection is achieved with a fantastical projection of cargo the ECRL will transport. As raised by economist KS Jomo, the ECRL is expecting to carry 60 million tonnes of freight yearly by 2032 even though KTM’s existing freight haulage is only 6 million tonnes across the entirety of its existing rail network from Padang Besar to Johor Bahru.
How exactly is the ECRL expecting to see 10 times the amount of freight currently being transported on the matured and industrialised west coast of Peninsula Malaysia?
The BN Government must stop trying to mislead the people with fanciful daydreams and start providing data, analysis and studies to back up its wild and preposterous claims. Who will also take responsibility if the ECRL fails achieve any where close to the projections above? Will the Deputy Minister take responsibility by resigning from his position? Or will it be the Prime and Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak who owns the ECRL brainchild and awarded to contract to CCCC?
The rakyat has the right to know the details because it will be our children and grandchildren who will have to bear the reckless debt burden of the current government should the project fail to meet its lofty targets.
Yet despite the heavy price tag, the Deputy Finance Minister Datuk Othman Aziz told Parliament on 28 November that the project was expected to “break even from the operational aspect”, after just 8 years of operation in 2032.
The Deputy Minister’s statement is wildly ambitious on many counts.
Firstly, we have to assume that the Deputy Minister meant that “break even from the operational aspect” meant that it does not cover the enormous cost of constructing the ECRL, which is covered entirely by debt.
So far, the government has said that 85% of the project will be financed by China’s Export-Import Bank (EXIM), with a soft loan carrying an interest rate of 3.25% per annum repaid over 20 years with a 7-year moratorium. The remainder 15% will be financed via a sukuk issuance.
Therefore, the annual repayment of the ECRL borrowings will amount to an estimated whopping RM3.7 billion. This simply means that even if the ECRL is to “break even from the operational aspect” after 8 years, it will still be suffering cashflow losses of some RM3.7 billion annually!
However, even Datuk Othman Aziz’s claim of “break even from the operational aspect” is preposterous to begin with.
Datuk Othman claimed that the government was projecting a revenue of RM2.9 billion to be recorded in 2024. But this amount is more than 4 times the current revenue of KTM Berhad today!
The ridiculous revenue projection is achieved with a fantastical projection of cargo the ECRL will transport. As raised by economist KS Jomo, the ECRL is expecting to carry 60 million tonnes of freight yearly by 2032 even though KTM’s existing freight haulage is only 6 million tonnes across the entirety of its existing rail network from Padang Besar to Johor Bahru.
How exactly is the ECRL expecting to see 10 times the amount of freight currently being transported on the matured and industrialised west coast of Peninsula Malaysia?
The BN Government must stop trying to mislead the people with fanciful daydreams and start providing data, analysis and studies to back up its wild and preposterous claims. Who will also take responsibility if the ECRL fails achieve any where close to the projections above? Will the Deputy Minister take responsibility by resigning from his position? Or will it be the Prime and Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak who owns the ECRL brainchild and awarded to contract to CCCC?
The rakyat has the right to know the details because it will be our children and grandchildren who will have to bear the reckless debt burden of the current government should the project fail to meet its lofty targets.
Wednesday, November 08, 2017
Another ‘top secret’ 1MDB bailout by 1MDB via TRX land buyback by the Ministry of Finance
During the last parliamentary session, I had asked the Minister of Finance what is the cost and size of the land in Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) which its wholly-owned subsidiary, Aroma Teraju Sdn Bhd acquired from 1MDB in 2015.
The reply which I had received from the Dato’ Seri Najib Razak on 31 July, was that the information was protected by a confidentiality clause between the buyer and the seller.
The answer is ridiculous because both entities are wholly-owned by the Ministry of Finance, which in turn is accountable to both the Parliament and the public at large, and hence such information should never be a secret. This is especially since the price of a piece of land is in no way a threat to national security, and the information is certainly not protected by the Official Secrets Act.
Therefore, for the current sitting, I had asked why the land size and price for the purchase of Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) land by MOF-owned Aroma Teraju from 1MDB cannot be disclosed even though both companies were wholly-owned subsidiaries of MOF.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak responded by saying this was because of the agreement’s confidentiality clause to protect the commercial considerations of both parties. He goes on to say that these terms are consistent with the key terms used in the market among other similar transactions.
The Minister chose to ignore is that both Aroma Teraju and 1MDB are wholly-owned by MOF. What is the purpose of this secrecy when both parties in the agreement are owned by the Government?
There is only one reason for invoking this confidentiality clause, and it has nothing to with the purported “commercial considerations”. It is to cover up the fact that MoF paid over-the-top to buy back a fraction of the prime land it had sold at bargain basement prices to 1MDB in 2010.
Based on the 2011 1MDB Financial Statements, the 70 acre TRX land was acquired from the Government at the value RM194 million, or approximately RM64 per square feet in 2010.
However, in the same year that Aroma Teraju acquired the above-mentioned piece of land from 1MDB, the latter also sold other parcels of TRX land to other government related institutions. Lembaga Tabung Haji acquired 1.6 acres for RM188.5 million or more than RM2,800psf. Affin Bank, a subsidiary of Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera (LTAT), acquired 1.25 acres for RM255 million or nearly an eye-popping RM4,700psf.
If Aroma Teraju paid any where near the prices paid by Tabung Haji or Affin Bank, it would mean that Malaysian tax-payers would be been ripped off beyond their wildest imagination. Very simply, 1MDB purchased land from the Government at RM64psf and sold a fraction of the piece of undeveloped land back to the Government five years later at an exhorbitant thousands of ringgit per square feet.
I challenge the 1MDB, Arul Kanda or the Finance Minister to deny my allegations with facts and figures. Otherwise, it would merely confirm that the secrecy over a simple sales and purchase agreement between two government entities is really to cover up another one of the daylight robberies against the Malaysian tax-payers to bail out the debt-stricken 1MDB.
The reply which I had received from the Dato’ Seri Najib Razak on 31 July, was that the information was protected by a confidentiality clause between the buyer and the seller.
The answer is ridiculous because both entities are wholly-owned by the Ministry of Finance, which in turn is accountable to both the Parliament and the public at large, and hence such information should never be a secret. This is especially since the price of a piece of land is in no way a threat to national security, and the information is certainly not protected by the Official Secrets Act.
Therefore, for the current sitting, I had asked why the land size and price for the purchase of Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) land by MOF-owned Aroma Teraju from 1MDB cannot be disclosed even though both companies were wholly-owned subsidiaries of MOF.
Tony Pua minta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan apa sebabnya keluasan dan harga pembelian tanah Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) oleh syarikat Aroma Teraju daripada 1MDB tidak boleh diumumkan walaupun kedua-dua syarikat tersebut merupakan anak syarikat milik penuh Kementerian KewanganOnce again, in the reply dated 6 November 2017, I received utter nonsense from the Finance Minister which justified his being awarded “Asia’s Worst Finance Minister 2016” by FinanceAsia.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak responded by saying this was because of the agreement’s confidentiality clause to protect the commercial considerations of both parties. He goes on to say that these terms are consistent with the key terms used in the market among other similar transactions.
The Minister chose to ignore is that both Aroma Teraju and 1MDB are wholly-owned by MOF. What is the purpose of this secrecy when both parties in the agreement are owned by the Government?
There is only one reason for invoking this confidentiality clause, and it has nothing to with the purported “commercial considerations”. It is to cover up the fact that MoF paid over-the-top to buy back a fraction of the prime land it had sold at bargain basement prices to 1MDB in 2010.
Based on the 2011 1MDB Financial Statements, the 70 acre TRX land was acquired from the Government at the value RM194 million, or approximately RM64 per square feet in 2010.
However, in the same year that Aroma Teraju acquired the above-mentioned piece of land from 1MDB, the latter also sold other parcels of TRX land to other government related institutions. Lembaga Tabung Haji acquired 1.6 acres for RM188.5 million or more than RM2,800psf. Affin Bank, a subsidiary of Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera (LTAT), acquired 1.25 acres for RM255 million or nearly an eye-popping RM4,700psf.
If Aroma Teraju paid any where near the prices paid by Tabung Haji or Affin Bank, it would mean that Malaysian tax-payers would be been ripped off beyond their wildest imagination. Very simply, 1MDB purchased land from the Government at RM64psf and sold a fraction of the piece of undeveloped land back to the Government five years later at an exhorbitant thousands of ringgit per square feet.
I challenge the 1MDB, Arul Kanda or the Finance Minister to deny my allegations with facts and figures. Otherwise, it would merely confirm that the secrecy over a simple sales and purchase agreement between two government entities is really to cover up another one of the daylight robberies against the Malaysian tax-payers to bail out the debt-stricken 1MDB.
Tuesday, November 07, 2017
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission needs to grow a spine and really stand up to corruption.
I had asked in Parliament why the MACC had announced in June that it would not be carrying out investigations regarding the misappropriation of funds and abuse of power in the 1MDB scandal.
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in-charge of Integrity, Datuk Paul Low replied on 1 November that “investigations weren’t carried out because of existing investigations being done by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Bank Negara and the Police.”
There could not be a more shameless and irresponsible reply from the Minister and the Government.
The PAC – which barely scratched the surface of the 1MDB scandal, has no prosecutorial powers. Bank Negara Malaysia, on the other hand, was investigating 1MDB purely from the Financial Services Act and certainly did not deal with the parties who had profited from the scandal.
At the same time, while the Police may have been investigating the criminal elements in 1MDB, the MACC has powers, laws and jurisdictions which are completely different from the Police to tackle corruption cases.
That was the whole point of the Parliament passing the MACC Act in the first place, so that there is a dedicated and independent commission to tackle the scourge of corruption and not let the burden be shouldered by the Royal Malaysian Police. What type “independent commission” worth its salt is MACC, if it leaves investigations, especially a scandal of such scale to other agencies?
In January this year, MACC commissioner Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad warned corrupt politicians to “be careful”. He said he wasn’t afraid of protected individuals and would launch investigations without fear or favour. “Just you wait,” he had warned politicians.
Why is the MACC and Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad, after all its showboating, so afraid of investigating the country’s biggest and most blatant corruption scandal?
Malaysians have been waiting long for MACC to launch its investigations into 1MDB especially after similar investigations have already begun in the US, Switzerland and Singapore. Just this weekend, even 1MDB-linked Prince Turki of Saudi Arabia was hauled up as part of an anti-corruption sweep in his own Kingdom.
In Malaysia, multiple reports have been lodged with the MACC regarding the 1MDB scandal. These included reports filed in December 2014 by then UMNO Batu Kawan Division Deputy Chief Datuk Khairuddin Abu Hassan and more recently, a Pakatan Harapan Youth-linked NGO in July this year. Hence it is a serious breach of MACC’s duty for failing to look into complaints of corruption.
These submitted reports were to be evaluated before the Commission’s Information Evaluation Committee to determine whether there were elements of corruption or not. If elements of corruption are found, it is imperative that an MACC investigation is opened before being referred to the AG for legal prosecution.
Was the above process conveniently ignored in MACC’s special treatment for 1MDB? Was this a condition for Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad to be rapidly promoted to be appointed, less than 2 years ago, to be the Chief Commissioner in the first place?
It is preposterous for an independent commission like MACC to pass on its investigation to other agencies. Each authority has a different mandate to investigate, so it is entirely cowardly for MACC to turn a blind eye and let other agencies look into it.
Until the MACC finally grows a spine and properly considers reports against 1MDB, the commissioner's boastful warnings will remain in Malaysians’ eyes as baseless rhetoric.
Tony Pua meminta Perdana Menteri menyatakan apakah sebabnya Ketua Pesuruhjaya Suruhanjaya Pencegah Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) mengumumkan pada bulan Jun 2017 bahawa pihak SPRM tidak akan menjalankan siasatan ke atas ke penyelewengan dan penyalahgunaan kuasa dalam skandal 1MDB?
The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department in-charge of Integrity, Datuk Paul Low replied on 1 November that “investigations weren’t carried out because of existing investigations being done by the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), Bank Negara and the Police.”
There could not be a more shameless and irresponsible reply from the Minister and the Government.
The PAC – which barely scratched the surface of the 1MDB scandal, has no prosecutorial powers. Bank Negara Malaysia, on the other hand, was investigating 1MDB purely from the Financial Services Act and certainly did not deal with the parties who had profited from the scandal.
At the same time, while the Police may have been investigating the criminal elements in 1MDB, the MACC has powers, laws and jurisdictions which are completely different from the Police to tackle corruption cases.
That was the whole point of the Parliament passing the MACC Act in the first place, so that there is a dedicated and independent commission to tackle the scourge of corruption and not let the burden be shouldered by the Royal Malaysian Police. What type “independent commission” worth its salt is MACC, if it leaves investigations, especially a scandal of such scale to other agencies?
In January this year, MACC commissioner Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad warned corrupt politicians to “be careful”. He said he wasn’t afraid of protected individuals and would launch investigations without fear or favour. “Just you wait,” he had warned politicians.
Why is the MACC and Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad, after all its showboating, so afraid of investigating the country’s biggest and most blatant corruption scandal?
Malaysians have been waiting long for MACC to launch its investigations into 1MDB especially after similar investigations have already begun in the US, Switzerland and Singapore. Just this weekend, even 1MDB-linked Prince Turki of Saudi Arabia was hauled up as part of an anti-corruption sweep in his own Kingdom.
In Malaysia, multiple reports have been lodged with the MACC regarding the 1MDB scandal. These included reports filed in December 2014 by then UMNO Batu Kawan Division Deputy Chief Datuk Khairuddin Abu Hassan and more recently, a Pakatan Harapan Youth-linked NGO in July this year. Hence it is a serious breach of MACC’s duty for failing to look into complaints of corruption.
These submitted reports were to be evaluated before the Commission’s Information Evaluation Committee to determine whether there were elements of corruption or not. If elements of corruption are found, it is imperative that an MACC investigation is opened before being referred to the AG for legal prosecution.
Was the above process conveniently ignored in MACC’s special treatment for 1MDB? Was this a condition for Datuk Dzulkifly Ahmad to be rapidly promoted to be appointed, less than 2 years ago, to be the Chief Commissioner in the first place?
It is preposterous for an independent commission like MACC to pass on its investigation to other agencies. Each authority has a different mandate to investigate, so it is entirely cowardly for MACC to turn a blind eye and let other agencies look into it.
Until the MACC finally grows a spine and properly considers reports against 1MDB, the commissioner's boastful warnings will remain in Malaysians’ eyes as baseless rhetoric.
Wednesday, October 25, 2017
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak is the biggest purveyor of ‘fake news’ by singing 1MDB's praises in his blog but has no courage to debate the mother of all scandals in Parliament
On his blog yesterday, Najib gave us his economic vision for the country ahead of the 2018 Budget announcement on Friday.
However, the entire credibility of his “economic vision” collapsed with the outrageous claim that 1MDB has not only “brought the country good” but “is on track to realise a profit”.
1MDB is currently an empty shell, holding absolutely nothing but some RM40 billion of debts. How in the world is 1MDB “on track to realise a profit”?! If this is not a brazen attempt by the Prime Minister to create ‘fake news’, what is?
Dato’ Seri Najib argued that it was 1MDB which solved the lop-sided power purchase agreements attributed to the previous BN Prime Minister.
We are thankful that Dato’ Seri Najib finally admitted that those independent power producers (IPPs) were allowed to profit astronomically from the BN government of which he was part of before. However, Malaysians are still clueless as to how 1MDB apparently “solved” the above injustice.
As far as we are concerned, Malaysians didn’t enjoy a single sen in benefit as electricity tariffs have only increased and not decreased since 1MDB started acquiring these IPPs. Worse, the 1MDB’s RM12.1 billion-misadventure in the power sector resulted in multi-billion ringgit losses when it was forced to dispose of its entire energy interests to a China outfit for a mere RM9.3 billion.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak further told Malaysians to laud 1MDB for its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) work including its sponsorship of hajj pilgrimages and scholarships purportedly amounting to RM690 million.
What the Prime Minister failed to tell Malaysians is that the so-called CSR is funded entirely with government-guaranteed debt amounting to more than RM40 billion.
More pertinently, while RM690 million of the debt may have found its way to CSR initiatives, US$732 million or approximately RM3 billion found its way from 1MDB to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account in Ambank between 2011 to 2014. The Prime Minister has to date failed to debunk this expose by the US Depart of Justice.
Najib must think Malaysians fools to believe in all his outrageous lies.
If the Prime Minister really thinks that 1MDB has been the saviour of Malaysia, then he should immediately lift the ban on sensitive 1MDB questions raised in the august House. Instead, he should table a Ministerial Statement to ‘debunk’ all the so-called ‘lies’ by the members of the opposition and allow for a full debate on the 1MDB scandal.
However, if Dato’ Seri Najib Razak chooses not to be accountable in Parliament, then he will prove himself to be the most corrupt and cowardly Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia who relies on the BN-controlled mainstream media to propound his ‘fake news’.
However, the entire credibility of his “economic vision” collapsed with the outrageous claim that 1MDB has not only “brought the country good” but “is on track to realise a profit”.
1MDB is currently an empty shell, holding absolutely nothing but some RM40 billion of debts. How in the world is 1MDB “on track to realise a profit”?! If this is not a brazen attempt by the Prime Minister to create ‘fake news’, what is?
Dato’ Seri Najib argued that it was 1MDB which solved the lop-sided power purchase agreements attributed to the previous BN Prime Minister.
We are thankful that Dato’ Seri Najib finally admitted that those independent power producers (IPPs) were allowed to profit astronomically from the BN government of which he was part of before. However, Malaysians are still clueless as to how 1MDB apparently “solved” the above injustice.
As far as we are concerned, Malaysians didn’t enjoy a single sen in benefit as electricity tariffs have only increased and not decreased since 1MDB started acquiring these IPPs. Worse, the 1MDB’s RM12.1 billion-misadventure in the power sector resulted in multi-billion ringgit losses when it was forced to dispose of its entire energy interests to a China outfit for a mere RM9.3 billion.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak further told Malaysians to laud 1MDB for its Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) work including its sponsorship of hajj pilgrimages and scholarships purportedly amounting to RM690 million.
What the Prime Minister failed to tell Malaysians is that the so-called CSR is funded entirely with government-guaranteed debt amounting to more than RM40 billion.
More pertinently, while RM690 million of the debt may have found its way to CSR initiatives, US$732 million or approximately RM3 billion found its way from 1MDB to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account in Ambank between 2011 to 2014. The Prime Minister has to date failed to debunk this expose by the US Depart of Justice.
Najib must think Malaysians fools to believe in all his outrageous lies.
If the Prime Minister really thinks that 1MDB has been the saviour of Malaysia, then he should immediately lift the ban on sensitive 1MDB questions raised in the august House. Instead, he should table a Ministerial Statement to ‘debunk’ all the so-called ‘lies’ by the members of the opposition and allow for a full debate on the 1MDB scandal.
However, if Dato’ Seri Najib Razak chooses not to be accountable in Parliament, then he will prove himself to be the most corrupt and cowardly Prime Minister in the history of Malaysia who relies on the BN-controlled mainstream media to propound his ‘fake news’.
Tuesday, October 24, 2017
The Speaker has gone bonkers in his over-zealousness to cover up the 1MDB mega-scandal, in this case a US$600 million (RM2.5 billion) emergency bailout of 1MDB by the Ministry of Finance in August 2017
The Parliament question time has become a complete joke. During the last sitting, I had 5 questions rejected for asking questions with regards to 1MDB. This round, I have 3, in part because I submitted less questions on 1MDB to avoid too many questions being thrown out.
However, the basis of rejecting the questions I had posed remained completely untenable. For example, I had asked submitted the following question to be answered today:
However, I received a rejection letter from the Speaker claiming that the question could not be answered presumably because it would be subjudice as “the matter is in court”. But the above payment which is part of an agreed settlement with IPIC has nothing to do with any court, whether in Malaysia or any where around the world.
I didn’t even ask about the ‘settlement’ itself. I merely asked if the MOF helped 1MDB, directly or indirectly, with the US$600 million payment to IPIC which was made in the month of August. Hence, how is this in any way related to any court case?
The Speaker should be reminded that in April this year, it was 1MDB itself who claimed that its payment obligations would be funded by the monetisation of investment ‘units’.
In August, 1MDB changed their tune and said that the payments were funded through the ‘proceeds of the on-going rationalisation programme’. What exactly is this rationalisation programme?
Is it not ridiculous that 1MDB can make all sorts of conflicting and vague statements to the public but Members of Parliament have no recourse to obtain any clarification or confirmations from the Ministers?
Both 1MDB and the MOF need to come clean about the source of these payments. If the Ministry is helping make these payments, surely the rakyat have a right to know. In fact, the refusal to respond has only confirmed the suspicions that the MOF has indeed conducted an emergency RM2.5 billion bailout of 1MDB in August this year.
We very much regret that the purportedly independent Speaker’s Office is now helping 1MDB and MOF cover up questions on the scandal. I will certainly raise this question again in my speech in this sitting and it will make a complete mockery of the Budget debate if the Finance Minister cannot tell us where our money has been used or spent.
However, the basis of rejecting the questions I had posed remained completely untenable. For example, I had asked submitted the following question to be answered today:
Tony Pua meminta Menteri Kewangan menyatakan adakah 1MDB membayar lebih kurang US$600 juta kepada IPIC pada bulan Ogos 2017 melalui pengewangan (“monetisation”) ‘unit’ dana pelaburan 1MDB? Adakah Kementerian Kewangan telah membantu membiayai bayaran tersebut secara langsung atau tidak langsung?The question was whether 1MDB’s settlement to Abu Dhabi’s IPIC was funded through the monetisation of 1MDB investment ‘units’ and/or whether the Ministry of Finance (MOF) had helped support these payments either directly or indirectly.
However, I received a rejection letter from the Speaker claiming that the question could not be answered presumably because it would be subjudice as “the matter is in court”. But the above payment which is part of an agreed settlement with IPIC has nothing to do with any court, whether in Malaysia or any where around the world.
I didn’t even ask about the ‘settlement’ itself. I merely asked if the MOF helped 1MDB, directly or indirectly, with the US$600 million payment to IPIC which was made in the month of August. Hence, how is this in any way related to any court case?
The Speaker should be reminded that in April this year, it was 1MDB itself who claimed that its payment obligations would be funded by the monetisation of investment ‘units’.
In August, 1MDB changed their tune and said that the payments were funded through the ‘proceeds of the on-going rationalisation programme’. What exactly is this rationalisation programme?
Is it not ridiculous that 1MDB can make all sorts of conflicting and vague statements to the public but Members of Parliament have no recourse to obtain any clarification or confirmations from the Ministers?
Both 1MDB and the MOF need to come clean about the source of these payments. If the Ministry is helping make these payments, surely the rakyat have a right to know. In fact, the refusal to respond has only confirmed the suspicions that the MOF has indeed conducted an emergency RM2.5 billion bailout of 1MDB in August this year.
We very much regret that the purportedly independent Speaker’s Office is now helping 1MDB and MOF cover up questions on the scandal. I will certainly raise this question again in my speech in this sitting and it will make a complete mockery of the Budget debate if the Finance Minister cannot tell us where our money has been used or spent.
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.
Thursday, July 27, 2017
Is Treasurer-General and 1MDB Chairman, Tan Sri Irwan Serigar aware of a third ‘secret’ Letter of Support for 1MDB’s US$975 million borrowing from a Deutsche Bank-led consortium in September 2014?
The latest suit filed by the United States Department of Justice (US DOJ) last month exposed a new allegation Dato’ Seri Najib Razak signed a ‘secret’ Letter of Support for 1MDB to secure a US$975 million loan from a Deutsche Bank-led consortium in September 2014.
The US DOJ suit stated that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak, referred to as “Malaysian Official 1 (MO1)”, “on behalf of the Government of Malaysia, provided a Letter of Support to Deutsche Bank in connection with the $975 million loan.”
This would have been a third Letter of Support issued by Dato’ Seri Najib Razak as the Finance Minister to effectively guarantee borrowings by 1MDB. The letters had stated that “in the event 1MDB… fails to provide the required funds, Malaysia shall then step in to inject the necessary capital into the Issuer or make payments to ensure the Issuer’s obligations are fully met”.
The DOJ suit further noted that “internal Deutsche Bank records reflect that 1MDB officials opted to provide a Letter of Support signed by MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1, rather than some form of guarantee by 1MDB… at least in part because a letter of support did not require Bank Negara or Cabinet approval. At the request of 1MDB, all references to the Letter of Support were removed from the Facility Agreement.”
I had submitted a question to the Finance Minister to confirm the existence of the letter in the current parliamentary sitting. However, the question has been inexplicably rejected by the Speaker on the ultra-flimsy grounds of presumably questionable assumptions (“sangkaan”).
I had last week issued a statement via a press conference seeking answers from Dato’ Seri Najib Razak himself as to whether he had indeed issued this “secret” Letter of Support and whether he had the authorisation from the Cabinet and Ministry of Finance to do so.
However, the questions posed have been met with utter silence, whether from the Prime Minister himself or from his Cabinet cheerleaders.
I can fully understand why the Prime Minister might want to remain absolutely silent so as not to incriminate himself with any answers he may provide.
Hence, I now pose the same questions to the Treasurer-General of the Ministry of Finance, Tan Sri Irwan Serigar who has also been appointed as the Chairman of 1MDB just a year ago.
As the Treasurer-General of Finance Ministry, is Tan Sri Irwan Serigar aware that the Minister of Finance had signed a third Letter of Support for 1MDB in September 2014? The official reply provided by the Minister of Finance in March 2016 stated that there were only 2 such Letters of Support issued in March 2013 for US$3 billion and another in March 2015 for US$150 million.
Was the reply which would have been prepared and approved by the Treasurer-General mistaken? Or was he, horrors of horrors, completely unaware that a third ‘secret’ Letter of Support had actually been issued by the Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
Secondly, even if he was not previously aware of the ‘secret’ letter, Tan Sri Irwan Serigar, as the Treasurer-General and 1MDB Chairman, must surely investigate. Has he called Duetsche Bank to verify the existence of the Letter of Support as alleged by the US DOJ?
If Tan Sri Irwan fails to do the simple task of calling up the Bank to confirm this information, then he has betrayed the trust of Malaysian tax-payers as the most senior financial civil servant in the country today.
If he is unable to protect the financial interest of the 30 million Malaysians in the country, then he is completely unfit to continue in his position, both as the Treasurer-General and the 1MDB Chairman.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak must come clean as to whether there was another undocumented “letter of support” for 1MDB in 2014 to borrow US$975 million from a Deutsche Bank-led consortium
In November 2014, when it was first discovered that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak had signed a “letter of support” to enable 1MDB to secure a US$3 billion bond in March 2013, it was immediately met with denial in Parliament.
On 6 November 2014, Datuk Ahmad Maslan, the then Deputy Minister of Finance had insisted in Parliament that the Government did not issue any such “letter of support”. However, a few days later, he conceded to the media that such a “letter of support” existed and he was ultimately forced to apologise to the House for his “error” on 18 November 2014.
The existence of this “letter of support” had major financial implications for the Government because it stated that “In the event, 1MDB has shareholder of the issuer fails to provide the required funds… Malaysia shall then step in to inject the necessary capital into the issuer or make payment to ensure the issuers obligations are fully met.” This meant that the Malaysian Government had effectively guaranteed, one way or another, the US$3 billion 1MDB borrowing above.
As reported by The Edge Financial Daily on 12 November 2014, Datuk Ahmad Maslan had said that there was “no other letter of support for 1MDB apart from the US$3 billion” during a media conference at the Parliament.
Further on 16 March 2016, when questioned by the Member of Parliament for Indera Mahkota, Dato’ Fauzi Abdul Rahman, the Finance Minister had confirmed that there were only TWO “letters of support” which was issued by the Government, including another for 1MDB’s US$150 million borrowing from Bank Exim in March 2015.
However, we have since discovered, via information provided by the latest United States Department of Justice filing to seize assets acquired with funds laundered from 1MDB that there exist another secret “letter of support” to borrow US$975 million from a Deutsche Bank-led consortium in September 2014.
The US DOJ suit stated that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak, referred to as “Malaysian Official 1 (MO1)”,
“on behalf of the Government of Malaysia, provided a Letter of Support to Deutsche Bank in connection with the $975 million loan.”
The suit further noted that “internal Deutsche Bank records reflect that 1MDB officials opted to provide a Letter of Support signed by MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1, rather than some form of guarantee by 1MDB… at least in part because a letter of support did not require Bank Negara or Cabinet approval. At the request of 1MDB, all references to the Letter of Support were removed from the Facility Agreement.”
Like the earlier “letters of support”, the Government agrees to financial support to 1MDB to ensure the company’s ability to repay. Dato’ Seri Najib Razak even “waived its sovereign immunity in connection with disputes arising out of the Letter of Support”.
I have submitted a simple question in the current sitting asking the Prime Minister to confirm if he had indeed issued a “Letter of Support” in connection to the US$975 million loan from Deutsche Bank. The question has been rejected on the basis that it was “sangkaan”, or “presumably questionable assumptions”.
There was no assumptions in my question. I had asked a simple matter as to whether there was indeed a “letter of support” issued in September 2014. If there isn’t, just say “no”. What’s so difficult?
Both Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and the Parliament’s refusal to entertain the simple factual question only serves to confirm the suspicions in everyone’s minds that such a secret guarantee was indeed issued. Dato’ Seri Najib Razak cannot come to the Parliament to say “yes” to the question simply because it would mean that he had previously lied to the Parliament when he said there were only 2 such letters for the sums of US$3 billion and US$150 million.
This further raises the question as to whether Dato’ Seri Najib Razak had issued the letter without the Cabinet’s approval or for that matter, without the knowledge of the Finance Ministry – which will be a clear cut abuse of power by the Prime Minister. I will confer with Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, the former Deputy Prime Minister to confirm if such a “letter of support” which binds the Malaysian Government was ever discussed in the Cabinet.
If not, then the Attorney-General must commence immediate investigations over the possible criminal breach of trust, abuse of power and even fraud against Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
Wednesday, July 26, 2017
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak must answer what happened to the US$3.51 billion 1MDB said it has paid to IPIC or its subsidiaries
Yesterday, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak told the Malaysian and international investment community that there were only “lapses in governance” in 1MDB but he has “ordered investigations into the company at a scale unprecedented in our nation's history”.
If it were indeed true that investigations were are an “unprecedented” scale, then the investigators must be the most incompetent ever seen in Malaysian history. This is because to date, the key questions surrounding the various dodgy investments by 1MDB and the billions of ringgit misappropriated, often to entities owned by Jho Low have never been explained.
In one of the few questions with regards to 1MDB which was not rejected by the Parliament Speaker, I had asked Dato’ Seri Najib Razak who is also the Finance Minister, why did we assume the liabilities of IPIC’s guarantee for 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion worth of bonds when 1MDB claimed that we have already paid IPIC or its subsidiaries the sum of US$3.51 billion.
1MDB, via its President and CEO, Arul Kanda, testified to both the Auditor-General and the Public Accounts Committee that 1MDB had already paid US$1.367 billion in collateral deposits in 2012, US$993 million in options termination compensation in 2014 and an additional US$1.15 billion in “top-up security deposit” also in 2014 to the IPIC group.
In the Finance Minister’s reply, he stated that 1MDB “is responsible for all future interest payments and the repayment of the principal for the 2 bonds” while the Ministry of Finance Incorporated has provided IPIC with the relevant “undertaking” and “indemnity”. This effectively means that the Malaysian government has taken over the guarantee from IPIC.
The problem is, despite the boast of “investigations… at a scale unprecendented in our nation’s history”, Malaysians are no nearer to finding out what happened to the US$3.51 billion we have already paid.
And it is very apparent that the Prime Minister is also hiding this information via a convenient “lapse of governance” because he failed to answer this question in his parliamentary reply.
It is as if the US$3.51 billion paid to the IPIC group previously was but a minor detail, or an insignificant “lapse in governance” which didn’t require any justification or concern on the part of the Government.
Hence Dato’ Seri Najib Razak is only showing the thickness of his skin by trivialising the unprecedented scale of the RM50 billion 1MDB scandal and dismissing the Opposition protests as blowing the issue “out of proportion”.
Instead, the continued secrecy of the Auditor-General’s Report on 1MDB and the refusal to entertain 1MDB questions in Parliament seriously only leads to the public believe that the US$3.51 billion above, and more other billions of ringgit have been misappropriated, or worse, stolen at “a scale unprecedented”.Tuesday, July 25, 2017
Dato’ Seri Azalina Othman’s denial of a massive parliamentary cover up over 1MDB questions by the Speaker has no credibility whatsoever.
Opposition Members of Parliament were in a state of shock yesterday upon taking our seats at the start of the second sitting this year. More than 30 questions, all of which concerns the single largest financial scandal ever to hit Malaysia, 1MDB were rejected by the House Speaker.
While some of our athletes are making inroads overseas and breaking new records, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin is determined not to be left out of the party. The Guiness Book of Records of Malaysia must take note of the sheer incredible scale of rejection of parliamentary questions in a single sitting.
I myself had 5 questions rejected – possibly an individual parliamentary record in itself.
The opposition uproar was met with an ‘official’ denial by the Minister in-charge of parliamentary affairs, Dato’ Seri Azalina Othman who described the “cover-up” allegations as “utterly baseless”. The fact that a member of the executive, who is an interested party in the scandal, had to step forward to defend the Speaker who is supposed to be impartial in the running of the august House speaks volumes.
Dato’ Seri Azalina even had the cheek to reprimand the Opposition MPs and asked them to “give precedence to issues that concern people under their respective constituencies”.
The blinkered Minister obviously doesn’t realise that my constituents voted for me overwhelmingly not because I spend my time debating about drains and potholes in my constituency – although those problems are dealt with by my office with the local council. They gave me a very specific mandate to not only check a corrupt and kleptocratic government, but also to expose all the wrong-doings of those who are in power.
In fact, as an MP who achieved the second highest majority in the country with 45,000 votes in the last general election, my constituents believe that their livelihood would be much better – less debt, better exchange rates and lower cost of living, if I succeed in throwing out the corrupt BN administration in the next round.
The Minister had argued that our questions were “against the Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders”.
As an example, let me ask the Minister, how the following rejected question was “against the Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders”.
I had asked the Minister of Finance to
“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”.
The Speaker had rejected the above question on the pretext of presumably questionable assumption (“sangkaan”) and a figment of my imagination (“buah fikiran”).
The Finance Ministers as well as 1MDB itself have 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.
Hence where is the “sangkaan” or “buah fikiran” in the above question when I was only asking what is the current asset value as well as which custodian bank was holding the “units”?
Instead, ironically, it is the refusal of the Speaker to approve and the Minister to answer the question that leads to a reasonable “sangkaan” that the “units” are fraudulent or are of minimal value, and perhaps there is no longer any “custodian bank”!
Tan Sri Pandikar Amin has unquestionably and possibly irreversibly condemned the Parliament into a kangaroo sitting. Instead of leaving a legacy of reform which will lead us to the heights of a first world parliament, he has now disgraced the highest legislative institution of the land.
Friday, March 31, 2017
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak undisputed King of Obfuscation, carefully wording parliamentary replies with selected choice facts
Meanwhile, crucial details are deliberately omitted, calculated to present an alternate reality for the media and the rakyat.
At first, I was both amused and bemused by yesterday’s headline on Malaysiakini story, “PM: 1MDB has cleared its bank debts, short-term debts”. The headline is factually correct, although it needs an alert and informed reader to read between the lines.
Later however, I was stumped and stupefied by the headlines of The Star and The New Straits Times (NST), screaming “Najib: 1MDB is now debt free” and “1MDB now debt free: Finance Ministry”.
I immediately sought out my colleague, Member of Parliament for Bakri, Er Teck Hwa for a copy of Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s parliamentary reply to his question, which was the basis for the above news stories.
He had asked the Finance Minister to state, among other things, “debts and assets of 1MDB in and out of Malaysia for the years, 2015 and 2016”.
Dato’ Seri Najib Razak responded that 1MDB made full settlement amounting to RM229.5mil for a revolving credit facility to Affin Bank in November, 2015.
Last year, 1MDB has also successfully repaid a RM950mil in a standby credit facility from the Federal Government, a RM2bil term-loan facility from Marstan Investments N.V and a US$150mil term financing facility from Exim Bank.
With the RM3.8 billion worth of debts repaid, the Finance Minister further added that 1MDB no longer have any borrowings with banks, nor any other short-term debts.
As if on cue, knowingly or unknowingly, The Star and The NST fell for it hook, line and sinker by declaring that “1MDB is now debt free”, painting most beautiful alternate reality which the Prime Minister would like you to believe.
Except the reality is so exceedingly different, that you can only conclude that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s reply was deliberately designed to obfuscate the truth to achieve the effect convincing Malaysians of the biggest lie of them all, that “1MDB is debt free”.
Dato’ Seri Najib has conveniently and mischievously failed to disclose the multiple elephants squeezed into the room - that 1MDB still have outstanding
(i) a 30-year RM5 billion bond which is guaranteed by the Federal Government
(ii) two 10-year US$1.75 billion bonds which was guaranteed by Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC) but have since been indemnified by the Ministry of Finance, Incorporated (MoF Inc)
(iii) a 10-year US$3.0 billion bond, guaranteed with a “Letter of Support” issued by the Minister of Finance
(iv) a US$1.0 billion advance by IPIC, indemnified by MOF Inc
(v) at least US$230 million worth of interest payments by IPIC on behalf of 1MDB, indemnified by MOF Inc.
Hence, the total amount of 1MDB debt still outstanding, and directly or indirectly guaranteed by the Federal Government are RM5.0 billion and at least US$7.73 billion, or a total of more than RM39 billion!
This is despite the fact that the Federal Government has already bailed out 1MDB’s real estate division by assuming 1MDB’s RM2.4 billion worth of sukuk and another RM800 million borrowed from SOCSO.
In addition, the RM39 billion is still outstanding despite the fact that 1MDB has already disposed of its power plant assets for a total of RM9.83 billion.
Hence it complete defies belief that Dato’ Seri Najib Razak was less than truthful with the material omission of more than RM39 billion worth debt in his reply to my Bakri colleague. Instead, the Prime Minister chose to extol 1MDB’s RM3.8 billion repayments, barely a-tenth of the scandal-ridden fund’s total debts.
He even carefully worded his happy conclusion, that 1MDB no longer owes any bank any money or any other short term debts, to skew the impression and perception of those who are not alert or informed. If this does not crown Dato’ Seri Najib the devious King of Obfuscation in Malaysia, then I certainly don’t know what would.
Monday, March 27, 2017
Open Invitation to Second Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani on Monday, 27 March 2017
A week ago, Second Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani wrote an open letter to me asking me to give the 1MDB issue “a rest”. I had responded the next day with an open letter outlining some of the many reasons why I won’t “give it a rest”. This includes the fact that the Minister has not only failed to answer the questions which have been posed, and the multiple attempts to obfuscate the truth for the Malaysian public.
However, a week later, the Minister has unfortunately chosen to maintain an elegant silence. Perhaps Dato’ Seri Johari is just hoping that I would have no choice but to then “give it a rest”.
If so, the Minister must be daydreaming. Instead, I would like to offer Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani the perfect opportunity to not only give the 1MDB issue a rest, but to give me “a rest”.
I would like to extend an open invitation to the Second Finance Minister to come to my fund-raising dinner on Saturday, 6 May 2017 to be held in the heart of the Petaling Jaya Utara (PJU) constitueny, at the SS2 open air carpark.
Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani will be given a full hour to speak uninterrupted to my voters to tell them about why they should not only give the 1MDB issue arest, but why they give me a rest by voting me out of office. There would be no better opportunity for the Minister to do so than in front of an expected sell-out crowd of 300 tables.
Dato’ Seri Johari can explain to the 3,000 best-behaved audience why my “behaviour in respect of the entire affair does not fit that of a lawmaker”.
The Minister is free to put forth his argument, per his open letter, that “the spectacle of name-calling, not only towards me but towards other members of the administration as well, is nothing less than embarrassing and demeaning to your standing as a Member of Parliament.”
Then the Minister can ask the voters of PJU directly, whether “the folks of Petaling Jaya Utara elected you as their MP to do better things than just being obsessed with 1MDB”.
In fact, the other speakers who are attending the dinner are DAP Parliamentary Leader, Lim Kit Siang; former Prime Minister, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad; Amanah President Mat Sabu and PKR Vice-President, Rafizi Ramli. The Minister has a chance to put all of us ‘out of business’.
No BN Ministers would offer me such an opportunity to attend their official events and get even 15 minutes to explain how the Najib administration has stolen and misappropriated some RM25 billion of funds raised by 1MDB.
However, perhaps in my foolishness, I am giving UMNO-BN an excellent chance to sign my political death warrant. The question is, will Dato’ Seri Johari have the courage and conviction in his defense of 1MDB to pick up the gauntlet?
Monday, March 20, 2017
Open Letter by Tony Pua, DAP National Publicity Secretary and Member of Parliament for Petaling Jaya Utara to Second Finance Minister, Dato’ Seri Johari Abdul Ghani on Tuesday, 20 March 2017
Dear Minister,
Thank you so much for your Open Letter addressed to me which was issued yesterday. I am not sure whether I should be honoured to have received such a letter from a Minister for the very first time in my 9 years as a Member of Parliament.
Dato’,
You are extremely unhappy apparently because I called you a “liar” and accused you of “covering up for the Prime Minister”. I checked my facts again and I’m more than happy to stand by my accusations.
Earlier this year, you told the media repeatedly that the Finance Ministry (MOF) would not take over any of the 1MDB’s debts. This was a specific response to my question raised in mid-January as to whether the MOF took over 1MDB’s RM800 million loan from SOCSO and RM2.4 billion sukuk.
It was only when I received the convoluted parliamentary reply in the current sitting, I could conclude that MOF did indeed take over these debts. The sad thing about the reply from the Minister of Finance was that it was clearly written in a way to obfuscate the truth.
You then dug a deeper hole for yourself by arguing that the RM3.2 billion of debt was an “operating debt” belonging to 1MDB’s wholly-owned subsidiary, 1MDB Real Estate (1MDB RE) and hence was not considered as 1MDB’s debt. I then said that “no Finance Minister worth his salt would argue that the ‘operating debts’ of a wholly-owned subsidiary does not belong to the parent company’s accounting books”.
I also proved with facts published in the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Report, extracted from the Auditor-General’s (AG) report that more than 87% or RM2.8 billion of the RM3.2 billion of 1MDB RE borrowings never went towards the development of 1MDB’s real estate properties. Hence I asked why did the MOF not insist that these advances to 1MDB be repaid?
Dato’,
You then went on to tell an audience at a MIDF lunch talk that the Malaysian government couldn’t press charges against 1MDB personalities “without complete information”. You supported your claim by saying the the Auditor-General and the PAC could not point to anything specifically wrong with 1MDB.
Again, I pointed to specific sections of the PAC Report which clearly concluded that the 1MDB top management has on dozens of occasions – lied and misled the Board of Directors, defied the decisions of the Board or worse, acted without the Board’s authority, all of which are legal offences. The PAC even asked the authorities to investigate the CEO, Datuk Shahrol Halmi and other officers involved for the above wrongdoings. However, a year later, Datuk Shahrol Halmi remains comfortably as of today, a Director of PEMANDU agency in the Prime Minister’s Department.
You added in your letter that, “as far as the government is concerned, there is nothing to hide and nothing to cover up.” Then, I ask you, if so, why do you not propose for the Cabinet refusing to declassify the ‘harmless’ Auditor-General’s Report?
However, instead of answering all of the above questions, you ask me to “give it a rest”.
You opined that 1MDB is the most scrutinised entity by all enforcement agencies in Malaysia. However, you fail to also disclose that every single investigating agency was hampered and disrupted.
When the PAC announced that we were summoning Jho Low for questioning, the PAC Chairman was soon replaced by Datuk Hasan Arifin who promptly reversed the decision. Datuk Hasan, even responded that he has to “cari makan” when asked by the media if the Prime Minister would be summoned.
Despite the diligence of the Auditor-General’s Office, key documents such as 1MDB’s bank statements for its overseas subsidiaries were not handed over to the AG. Neither did Arul Kanda or Datuk Shahrol hand over many other documents they promised when requested by the PAC.
The biggest farce must be the “Super-Taskforce” investigating 1MDB comprising of the Attorney-General, the Inspector-General of Police, the MACC Chief Commissioner and the Bank Negara Governor set up by the Prime Minister himself. Did you forget that just as the then Attorney-General discovered shenanigans relating to the Prime Minister, he was promptly “retired” on spurious ‘health’ reasons? As if on queue, the new Attorney-General effectively dissolved the “Super-Taskforce” and even went to the extent of instructing the MACC to stop any further investigations on the matter.
Dato’,
You started your letter whining that you are merely working “serve the nation” by taking “positive and proactive” steps.
Perhaps let me gently remind you that there is a difference between ‘serving the nation’ and ‘serving the Prime Minister’, by covering up the scandal so that the truth gets swept under the carpet and the crooks get away scot-free.
Do you not realise that we are now a renown kleptocracy and how damaging that is for our country? Everyone who has taken an interest in the affairs of Malaysia knows from the documents presented by the United States Department of Justice and the Singapore Courts that US$731 million from 1MDB, found its way through dodgy investment funds and deceptive offshore companies into the personal bank account of Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
Do you not think that to “serve the nation”, we must work to revive our heavily-tarnished global reputation? And do you not think that the only way we can remove the kleptocracy label from Malaysia is not by sweeping the truth under the carpet but instead ensure that the kleptocrats are charged and appropriately punished?
In fact, if you really want to take “positive and proactive steps” to help the nation, why haven’t you made a claim for the US$1 billion worth of assets being seized by the United States which were acquired with funds laundered and stolen from 1MDB? Why is the Government still keeping up the pretences that 1MDB did not lose these billions of dollars?
Dear Minister,
The above are just some of the many reasons why I won’t give the 1MDB issue a rest. The issue doesn’t deserve to be rested because you and your fellow Ministers have refused to answer simple questions and more importantly, the crooks who audaciously misappropriated more than US$5 billion are still at large.
Any elected representative with any sense of morality and integrity, who believes in protecting the interest of the man-on-the-street and who wants justice meted out to criminals who rob the country will never let the matter rest until the truth is found.
I am sure that my voters in Petaling Jaya Utara and all right-thinking Malaysians would overwhelmingly back my dogged persistence and relentless pursuit to ensure that Malaysia’s corrupt leaders and its kleptocratic government are made accountable for their crimes.
Thank you so much for your Open Letter addressed to me which was issued yesterday. I am not sure whether I should be honoured to have received such a letter from a Minister for the very first time in my 9 years as a Member of Parliament.
Dato’,
You are extremely unhappy apparently because I called you a “liar” and accused you of “covering up for the Prime Minister”. I checked my facts again and I’m more than happy to stand by my accusations.
Earlier this year, you told the media repeatedly that the Finance Ministry (MOF) would not take over any of the 1MDB’s debts. This was a specific response to my question raised in mid-January as to whether the MOF took over 1MDB’s RM800 million loan from SOCSO and RM2.4 billion sukuk.
It was only when I received the convoluted parliamentary reply in the current sitting, I could conclude that MOF did indeed take over these debts. The sad thing about the reply from the Minister of Finance was that it was clearly written in a way to obfuscate the truth.
You then dug a deeper hole for yourself by arguing that the RM3.2 billion of debt was an “operating debt” belonging to 1MDB’s wholly-owned subsidiary, 1MDB Real Estate (1MDB RE) and hence was not considered as 1MDB’s debt. I then said that “no Finance Minister worth his salt would argue that the ‘operating debts’ of a wholly-owned subsidiary does not belong to the parent company’s accounting books”.
I also proved with facts published in the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Report, extracted from the Auditor-General’s (AG) report that more than 87% or RM2.8 billion of the RM3.2 billion of 1MDB RE borrowings never went towards the development of 1MDB’s real estate properties. Hence I asked why did the MOF not insist that these advances to 1MDB be repaid?
Dato’,
You then went on to tell an audience at a MIDF lunch talk that the Malaysian government couldn’t press charges against 1MDB personalities “without complete information”. You supported your claim by saying the the Auditor-General and the PAC could not point to anything specifically wrong with 1MDB.
Again, I pointed to specific sections of the PAC Report which clearly concluded that the 1MDB top management has on dozens of occasions – lied and misled the Board of Directors, defied the decisions of the Board or worse, acted without the Board’s authority, all of which are legal offences. The PAC even asked the authorities to investigate the CEO, Datuk Shahrol Halmi and other officers involved for the above wrongdoings. However, a year later, Datuk Shahrol Halmi remains comfortably as of today, a Director of PEMANDU agency in the Prime Minister’s Department.
You added in your letter that, “as far as the government is concerned, there is nothing to hide and nothing to cover up.” Then, I ask you, if so, why do you not propose for the Cabinet refusing to declassify the ‘harmless’ Auditor-General’s Report?
However, instead of answering all of the above questions, you ask me to “give it a rest”.
You opined that 1MDB is the most scrutinised entity by all enforcement agencies in Malaysia. However, you fail to also disclose that every single investigating agency was hampered and disrupted.
When the PAC announced that we were summoning Jho Low for questioning, the PAC Chairman was soon replaced by Datuk Hasan Arifin who promptly reversed the decision. Datuk Hasan, even responded that he has to “cari makan” when asked by the media if the Prime Minister would be summoned.
Despite the diligence of the Auditor-General’s Office, key documents such as 1MDB’s bank statements for its overseas subsidiaries were not handed over to the AG. Neither did Arul Kanda or Datuk Shahrol hand over many other documents they promised when requested by the PAC.
The biggest farce must be the “Super-Taskforce” investigating 1MDB comprising of the Attorney-General, the Inspector-General of Police, the MACC Chief Commissioner and the Bank Negara Governor set up by the Prime Minister himself. Did you forget that just as the then Attorney-General discovered shenanigans relating to the Prime Minister, he was promptly “retired” on spurious ‘health’ reasons? As if on queue, the new Attorney-General effectively dissolved the “Super-Taskforce” and even went to the extent of instructing the MACC to stop any further investigations on the matter.
Dato’,
You started your letter whining that you are merely working “serve the nation” by taking “positive and proactive” steps.
Perhaps let me gently remind you that there is a difference between ‘serving the nation’ and ‘serving the Prime Minister’, by covering up the scandal so that the truth gets swept under the carpet and the crooks get away scot-free.
Do you not realise that we are now a renown kleptocracy and how damaging that is for our country? Everyone who has taken an interest in the affairs of Malaysia knows from the documents presented by the United States Department of Justice and the Singapore Courts that US$731 million from 1MDB, found its way through dodgy investment funds and deceptive offshore companies into the personal bank account of Dato’ Seri Najib Razak.
Do you not think that to “serve the nation”, we must work to revive our heavily-tarnished global reputation? And do you not think that the only way we can remove the kleptocracy label from Malaysia is not by sweeping the truth under the carpet but instead ensure that the kleptocrats are charged and appropriately punished?
In fact, if you really want to take “positive and proactive steps” to help the nation, why haven’t you made a claim for the US$1 billion worth of assets being seized by the United States which were acquired with funds laundered and stolen from 1MDB? Why is the Government still keeping up the pretences that 1MDB did not lose these billions of dollars?
Dear Minister,
The above are just some of the many reasons why I won’t give the 1MDB issue a rest. The issue doesn’t deserve to be rested because you and your fellow Ministers have refused to answer simple questions and more importantly, the crooks who audaciously misappropriated more than US$5 billion are still at large.
Any elected representative with any sense of morality and integrity, who believes in protecting the interest of the man-on-the-street and who wants justice meted out to criminals who rob the country will never let the matter rest until the truth is found.
I am sure that my voters in Petaling Jaya Utara and all right-thinking Malaysians would overwhelmingly back my dogged persistence and relentless pursuit to ensure that Malaysia’s corrupt leaders and its kleptocratic government are made accountable for their crimes.
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Will Khairy demand for Maria Chin’s release since he mocked the opposition’s fear that SOSMA would be abused against peaceful assemblies when the Act was passed in April 2012?
The Securities Offences (Special Measures) Act (SOSMA) was passed in Dewan Rakyat on 17 April 2012. The controversial new law intended to fight and counter terrorism was hotly debated by both sides of the House.
Among the issue which was most fiercely discussed was the fact that provisions of SOSMA could be used against individuals deemed to be “carrying out activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy”.
The members of the opposition led by the then Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had argued furiously that such a clause of involving “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy” was too broad and will be subject to abuse by the authorities.
However, the Member of Parliament for Rembau, Khairy Jamaluddin, and a Minister in Najib’s Cabinet today, had mocked the opposition’s fear, claiming that they were not only unfounded, the letter of the proposed law was extremely clear and had no room for the purported abuse.
Instead, in his speech on the 16th April 2012, he praised the SOSMA Bill which was tabled by the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak himself, was “on the side of civil liberties”[1].
He criticised the Opposition Leader for not understanding that activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy means, “an activity carried out by a person or group of persons designed to overthrow or undermine Parliamentary Democracy by violence or unconstitutional means”.[2]
Subsequently, during his speech on the Amendments to the Penal Code (2012) the next day, Khairy further criticised the opposition’s position as “misleading” and reiterated that legitimate political dissent including peaceful assemblies or even, Bersih “is not detrimental to Parliamentary Democracy”.
“Saya dapati bahawa perbahasan daripada pihak pembangkang bukan mengelirukan tetapi amat lemah sekali sebab tidak mengkaji ataupun sengaja tidak mengakui bahawa sebenarnya apa yang dipinda ini tidaklah terlalu umum, tidaklah terlalu general, tidaklah terlalu longgar dan tidaklah satu peruntukan yang boleh ditafsirkan mengikut sesuka hati siapa-siapa pun.”
“…Kalau nak buat perhimpunan aman atau bersih pun, itu tidak detrimental to Parliamentary Democracy. Itu yang mereka [pembangkang] tak faham. Sudah cukup khusus daripada segi definisi yang diberi.”[3]
However, Bersih chairpeson, Maria Chin’s arrest under SOSMA three days ago has materialised all the fears expressed by the opposition MPs when the law was passed 4 years ago. Despite only organising a peaceful assembly to seek free and fair elections to ensure a clean government, the Police are investigating her for “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy” and detained her under SOSMA.
The question now for the Youth and Sports Minister is, will he now accept that he was over-zealous in his defence of the SOSMA and Penal Code Amendment Bills and his confidence with the authorities’ interpretation of the Acts in the spirit that they were intended was badly misplaced?
More importantly, will Khairy Jamaluddin do the honourable thing now to demand that Maria Chin be immediately released because she has been wrongfully arrested?
Or will he, more likely, keep his mouth shut and pretend that he had never said in Parliament that the SOSMA and Penal Code Amendment Bills will not be used on peaceful assemblies or Bersih?
[1] Hansard 16/4/2012 p18
[2] Hansard 16/4/2012 p24
[3] Hansard 17/4/2012 p73
Among the issue which was most fiercely discussed was the fact that provisions of SOSMA could be used against individuals deemed to be “carrying out activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy”.
The members of the opposition led by the then Opposition Leader, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim had argued furiously that such a clause of involving “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy” was too broad and will be subject to abuse by the authorities.
However, the Member of Parliament for Rembau, Khairy Jamaluddin, and a Minister in Najib’s Cabinet today, had mocked the opposition’s fear, claiming that they were not only unfounded, the letter of the proposed law was extremely clear and had no room for the purported abuse.
Instead, in his speech on the 16th April 2012, he praised the SOSMA Bill which was tabled by the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak himself, was “on the side of civil liberties”[1].
He criticised the Opposition Leader for not understanding that activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy means, “an activity carried out by a person or group of persons designed to overthrow or undermine Parliamentary Democracy by violence or unconstitutional means”.[2]
Subsequently, during his speech on the Amendments to the Penal Code (2012) the next day, Khairy further criticised the opposition’s position as “misleading” and reiterated that legitimate political dissent including peaceful assemblies or even, Bersih “is not detrimental to Parliamentary Democracy”.
“Saya dapati bahawa perbahasan daripada pihak pembangkang bukan mengelirukan tetapi amat lemah sekali sebab tidak mengkaji ataupun sengaja tidak mengakui bahawa sebenarnya apa yang dipinda ini tidaklah terlalu umum, tidaklah terlalu general, tidaklah terlalu longgar dan tidaklah satu peruntukan yang boleh ditafsirkan mengikut sesuka hati siapa-siapa pun.”
“…Kalau nak buat perhimpunan aman atau bersih pun, itu tidak detrimental to Parliamentary Democracy. Itu yang mereka [pembangkang] tak faham. Sudah cukup khusus daripada segi definisi yang diberi.”[3]
However, Bersih chairpeson, Maria Chin’s arrest under SOSMA three days ago has materialised all the fears expressed by the opposition MPs when the law was passed 4 years ago. Despite only organising a peaceful assembly to seek free and fair elections to ensure a clean government, the Police are investigating her for “activities detrimental to parliamentary democracy” and detained her under SOSMA.
The question now for the Youth and Sports Minister is, will he now accept that he was over-zealous in his defence of the SOSMA and Penal Code Amendment Bills and his confidence with the authorities’ interpretation of the Acts in the spirit that they were intended was badly misplaced?
More importantly, will Khairy Jamaluddin do the honourable thing now to demand that Maria Chin be immediately released because she has been wrongfully arrested?
Or will he, more likely, keep his mouth shut and pretend that he had never said in Parliament that the SOSMA and Penal Code Amendment Bills will not be used on peaceful assemblies or Bersih?
[1] Hansard 16/4/2012 p18
[2] Hansard 16/4/2012 p24
[3] Hansard 17/4/2012 p73
Monday, November 07, 2016
Does Transport Minister Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai really know what he is talking about when he said the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) doesn’t cost RM55 billion?
The Edge Financial Weekly quoted an executive from a construction outfit who said that at RM55 billion, the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL) “could be the most expensive rail infrastructure project in the world in its class... it’s a good project but not at this ridiculous price.”
The Edge cited the examples of the 215km Padma rail line in Bangladesh and 120km Mombasa rail link in Kenya which were being constructed by China Rail Construction Corp for RM68.1 million and RM61.4 million per kilometer respectively.
For another project in Ethiopia awarded to Turkish contractor, Yapi Merkezi, the 375km Awash-Weldia railway line of which more than 40% is built on challenging terrain, the cost was only US$1.7 billion or RM18.1 million per kilometer.
The question hence arises as to why is the Malaysian government awarding the 600km ECRL project to China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) at RM55 billion or RM91.7 million per kilometer without any open competitive tender exercise?
The Minister of Transport, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai tried to allay the concerns of the Malaysian public by claiming that the RM55 billion is not the cost of construction. Instead he claims that it is merely the value of the Financing Framework Agreement.
We have no idea whether the Transport Minister knows what he is talking about or whether he has even seen or read the above agreements given that his Deputy told the Parliament that he could not answer ECRL queries because it was not under the purview of the Transport Ministry but is instead under the Prime Minister’s Department control.
The question hence arises as to whether Datuk Seri Liow, who is also the MCA President is merely shooting off his hip, especially since the Prime Minister himself disclosed during his Budget 2017 address that “the 600-km rail will connect townships such as Port Klang, ITT Gombak, Bentong, Mentakab, Kuantan, Kemaman, Kerteh, Kuala Terengganu, Kota Bharu and ends in Tumpat, with an estimated cost of RM55 billion.”
Datuk Seri Liow even assured Malaysians that the construction cost of the ECRL was “very transparent” and that industry players were well aware of the cost per kilometre of the rail that would be laid. If so, then why didn’t he reveal the “real” cost of the project then?
Even if Datuk Seri Liow does indeed know better than his Prime Minister, his response further begs the question as to why should Malaysia borrow RM55 billion if the cost of the rail project is significantly less?
Malaysians fear a repeat of the multi-billion dollar 1MDB scandal where the state-owned company borrowed US$3.5 billion and RM6.8 billion, or approximately RM18.3 billion (at the then exchange rate of US$1:RM3.30) to acquire Tanjong Power and Genting Sanyen power plants for RM10.8 billion.
As we know today, the balance of the proceeds from the borrowings, US$1.367 billion were siphoned to a fictitious British Virgin Island incorporated Aabar Investment PJS Limited under the guise of a “collateral” to secure the bond guaranteed by Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC). Of the misappropriated amount, the United States Department of Justice has alleged that US$30 million was transferred to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account in Ambank while another US$238 million went to his stepson, Riza Aziz’s company in the United States, Red Granite.
The East Coast Economic Region (ECER) Development Council CEO, Datuk Jebasingam Issac John has previously been quoted by news reports in April 2014 that the ECRL will cost approximately RM30 billion. If the figure cited is indeed true and is the same figure Datuk Seri Liow is referring to, perhaps the Transport Minister should enlighten Malaysians as to where the balance of RM25 billion to be borrowed from China’s Exim Bank for the ECRL project will go to.
Can Datuk Seri Liow or any other Cabinet Minister guarantee Malaysians that the excess borrowings will not be misappropriated, perhaps even to bailout of 1MDB debts which were stolen? Is the Malaysian Government digging a bigger hole for itself in order to cover up the previous holes?
The Edge cited the examples of the 215km Padma rail line in Bangladesh and 120km Mombasa rail link in Kenya which were being constructed by China Rail Construction Corp for RM68.1 million and RM61.4 million per kilometer respectively.
For another project in Ethiopia awarded to Turkish contractor, Yapi Merkezi, the 375km Awash-Weldia railway line of which more than 40% is built on challenging terrain, the cost was only US$1.7 billion or RM18.1 million per kilometer.
The question hence arises as to why is the Malaysian government awarding the 600km ECRL project to China Communications Construction Company (CCCC) at RM55 billion or RM91.7 million per kilometer without any open competitive tender exercise?
The Minister of Transport, Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai tried to allay the concerns of the Malaysian public by claiming that the RM55 billion is not the cost of construction. Instead he claims that it is merely the value of the Financing Framework Agreement.
We have no idea whether the Transport Minister knows what he is talking about or whether he has even seen or read the above agreements given that his Deputy told the Parliament that he could not answer ECRL queries because it was not under the purview of the Transport Ministry but is instead under the Prime Minister’s Department control.
The question hence arises as to whether Datuk Seri Liow, who is also the MCA President is merely shooting off his hip, especially since the Prime Minister himself disclosed during his Budget 2017 address that “the 600-km rail will connect townships such as Port Klang, ITT Gombak, Bentong, Mentakab, Kuantan, Kemaman, Kerteh, Kuala Terengganu, Kota Bharu and ends in Tumpat, with an estimated cost of RM55 billion.”
Datuk Seri Liow even assured Malaysians that the construction cost of the ECRL was “very transparent” and that industry players were well aware of the cost per kilometre of the rail that would be laid. If so, then why didn’t he reveal the “real” cost of the project then?
Even if Datuk Seri Liow does indeed know better than his Prime Minister, his response further begs the question as to why should Malaysia borrow RM55 billion if the cost of the rail project is significantly less?
Malaysians fear a repeat of the multi-billion dollar 1MDB scandal where the state-owned company borrowed US$3.5 billion and RM6.8 billion, or approximately RM18.3 billion (at the then exchange rate of US$1:RM3.30) to acquire Tanjong Power and Genting Sanyen power plants for RM10.8 billion.
As we know today, the balance of the proceeds from the borrowings, US$1.367 billion were siphoned to a fictitious British Virgin Island incorporated Aabar Investment PJS Limited under the guise of a “collateral” to secure the bond guaranteed by Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC). Of the misappropriated amount, the United States Department of Justice has alleged that US$30 million was transferred to Dato’ Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank account in Ambank while another US$238 million went to his stepson, Riza Aziz’s company in the United States, Red Granite.
The East Coast Economic Region (ECER) Development Council CEO, Datuk Jebasingam Issac John has previously been quoted by news reports in April 2014 that the ECRL will cost approximately RM30 billion. If the figure cited is indeed true and is the same figure Datuk Seri Liow is referring to, perhaps the Transport Minister should enlighten Malaysians as to where the balance of RM25 billion to be borrowed from China’s Exim Bank for the ECRL project will go to.
Can Datuk Seri Liow or any other Cabinet Minister guarantee Malaysians that the excess borrowings will not be misappropriated, perhaps even to bailout of 1MDB debts which were stolen? Is the Malaysian Government digging a bigger hole for itself in order to cover up the previous holes?
Friday, November 04, 2016
Ministerial replies in Parliament over the multi-billion dollar 1MDB scandal, when there were replies, has made a mockery of our august institution
When travelling overseas, Malaysians are now inundated with questions as to how Dato’ Seri Najib Razak remains firmly in power as the Prime Minister of Malaysia despite a few billion ringgit of funds which were misappropriated from a state owned investment firm finding its way into his personal account.
Foreigners are bewildered as to how our so-called democratic system could tolerate such unprecedented excesses.
The reason is simple. Our parliamentary institution is a mere facade whose sole existence is to lend legitimacy to those who wield the ultimate power. It is a pesky inconvenience which Dato’ Seri Najib Razak needs to tolerate to continue to present a semblance of a modern progressive nation.
When asked of the Prime Minister’s near total absence from Parliamentary sittings, the Honourable Speaker defended Dato’ Seri Najib Razak, claiming that the Prime Minister would have more important things to do than “to sit here and see the same face and then they (MPs) ask irrelevant questions”.
If even the Speaker of the House treats the elected Members of Parliaments with such contempt, little could be expected of the Ministers and Deputy Ministers who are left to respond to the obviously “irrelevant questions” from MPs.
Questions were asked about the actions taken by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission pursuant the charges laid out by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to seize more than US$1 billion of assets laundered by Low Taek Jho and the Prime Minister’s stepson, Riza Aziz with funds misappropriated from 1MDB.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Razali Ibrahim responded that there is no need for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to question Riza Aziz, the stepson of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, as he is not being probed for graft..
"For the MACC, Riza is not under a corruption probe so there is no need for the MACC to summon him (for questioning)", he said.
And when MP for Bayan Baru, Sim Tze Tzin asked about DOJ’s allegations that Riza had bought luxury properties overseas with 1MDB funds, Razali audaciously replied, "what's wrong if people with lots of money buy things?"
Obviously the point that these funds were stolen from funds managed by the Government did not matter to the Minister.
Separately the MP for Puchong, Gobind Singh asked about the need to re-open MACC’s investigations into the billions of ringgit found in the Prime Minister’s personal bank account in the light of the DOJ filings. Datuk Razali Ibrahim astonishingly responded that the concluded MACC probe on Dato’ Seri Najib Abdul Razak's RM2.6 billion ‘donation’ did not look into the origins of the money.
"We (the MACC) were only looking into corruption, not where the money came from,” he said.
"We can't make assumptions about 1MDB, because of things in the US and Switzerland… They may be looking at the money trail, we only look at the question of corruption," he added while wrapping up his part of the Budget 2017 debate speech, focusing on the MACC and Felda.
The answer is as bizarre as it is dumbfounding. How can you rule out corruption if you fail to investigate the money trail? In fact, the admission by the Minister that MACC did not bother investigating the money trail to trace the origins of the funds which ended up in the Prime Minister’s accounts only goes to justify the call for MACC to re-open investigations because they have failed to perform their duties thoroughly and competently.
However, the fact that the Ministers can get away with such nonchalant and nonsensical replies in the highest legislative body of the land epitomises the collapse of Malaysia’s democratic institutions.
With a cabinet full of Ministers that know no shame, it explains why despite the severity and credibility of the corruption and embezzlement allegations against the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak remains firmly in grip of power.
The only way to remove Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and the ruling Barisan Nasional, is via the ballot box, even if Malaysians have to overcome the unfair electoral system.
Foreigners are bewildered as to how our so-called democratic system could tolerate such unprecedented excesses.
The reason is simple. Our parliamentary institution is a mere facade whose sole existence is to lend legitimacy to those who wield the ultimate power. It is a pesky inconvenience which Dato’ Seri Najib Razak needs to tolerate to continue to present a semblance of a modern progressive nation.
When asked of the Prime Minister’s near total absence from Parliamentary sittings, the Honourable Speaker defended Dato’ Seri Najib Razak, claiming that the Prime Minister would have more important things to do than “to sit here and see the same face and then they (MPs) ask irrelevant questions”.
If even the Speaker of the House treats the elected Members of Parliaments with such contempt, little could be expected of the Ministers and Deputy Ministers who are left to respond to the obviously “irrelevant questions” from MPs.
Questions were asked about the actions taken by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission pursuant the charges laid out by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) to seize more than US$1 billion of assets laundered by Low Taek Jho and the Prime Minister’s stepson, Riza Aziz with funds misappropriated from 1MDB.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Razali Ibrahim responded that there is no need for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to question Riza Aziz, the stepson of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, as he is not being probed for graft..
"For the MACC, Riza is not under a corruption probe so there is no need for the MACC to summon him (for questioning)", he said.
And when MP for Bayan Baru, Sim Tze Tzin asked about DOJ’s allegations that Riza had bought luxury properties overseas with 1MDB funds, Razali audaciously replied, "what's wrong if people with lots of money buy things?"
Obviously the point that these funds were stolen from funds managed by the Government did not matter to the Minister.
Separately the MP for Puchong, Gobind Singh asked about the need to re-open MACC’s investigations into the billions of ringgit found in the Prime Minister’s personal bank account in the light of the DOJ filings. Datuk Razali Ibrahim astonishingly responded that the concluded MACC probe on Dato’ Seri Najib Abdul Razak's RM2.6 billion ‘donation’ did not look into the origins of the money.
"We (the MACC) were only looking into corruption, not where the money came from,” he said.
"We can't make assumptions about 1MDB, because of things in the US and Switzerland… They may be looking at the money trail, we only look at the question of corruption," he added while wrapping up his part of the Budget 2017 debate speech, focusing on the MACC and Felda.
The answer is as bizarre as it is dumbfounding. How can you rule out corruption if you fail to investigate the money trail? In fact, the admission by the Minister that MACC did not bother investigating the money trail to trace the origins of the funds which ended up in the Prime Minister’s accounts only goes to justify the call for MACC to re-open investigations because they have failed to perform their duties thoroughly and competently.
However, the fact that the Ministers can get away with such nonchalant and nonsensical replies in the highest legislative body of the land epitomises the collapse of Malaysia’s democratic institutions.
With a cabinet full of Ministers that know no shame, it explains why despite the severity and credibility of the corruption and embezzlement allegations against the Prime Minister, Dato’ Seri Najib Razak remains firmly in grip of power.
The only way to remove Dato’ Seri Najib Razak and the ruling Barisan Nasional, is via the ballot box, even if Malaysians have to overcome the unfair electoral system.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)