A. Transaksi RM2.6 billion dan RM 42 juta SRC telah diluluskan Bank Negara. Bank Negara telah memenuhi kehendak undang-undang BAFIA dan Akta AMLA (Anti-Money Laundering Act) dalam membuat kelulusan transaksi tersebut.

B. Kelulusan transaksi tersebut juga telah melepaskan undang-undang rasuah di bawah Akta SPRM.

C. Undang-undang Perlembagaan Parti BN yang diluluskan oleh Pendaftar Pertubuhan di bawah kuasa Akta Pertubuhan yang membenarkan Ketua Parti menerima sumbangan dan dana disimpan dalam akaun proksi parti juga telah melepaskan bebanan undang-undang rasuah Akta SPRM.

D. Pengesahan SPRM sendiri berkaitan kebebaran dana itu didermakan Raja Saudi juga telah melepaskan bebanan undang-undang rasuah Akta SPRM.

E. Jelas sekali, keputusan AG menggunakan kuasa yang diperuntukan kepadanya dibuat bersandarkan faktor undang-undang dalam kes tersebut. AG telah terbukti menyempurnakan kehendak sesuatu keadilan dalam sesuatu prosiding undang-undang.

Dishonest misappropriation of property

403. Whoever dishonestly misappropriates, or converts to his own use, or causes any other person to dispose of, any property, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months and not more than five years and with whipping and shall also be liable to fine.

Dishonest misappropriation of property possessed by a deceased person at time of his death

404. Whoever dishonestly misappropriates, or converts to his own use or causes any other person to dispose of property, knowing that such property was in the possession of a deceased person at the time of that person’s decease, and has not since been in the possession of any person legally entitled to such possession, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term which shall not be less than six months and not more than five years and with whipping, and shall also be liable to fine; and the offender at the time of such person’s decease was employed by him as a clerk or servant, the imprisonment shall not be less than one year and not more than ten years and with whipping, and shall also be liable to fine.

Malaysian Bar ‘tainted’ by motion at AGM to remove AG

18 Mar 2016, PM 4:43

A Penang DAP backbencher said the Malaysian Bar has been “tainted” by its actions against attorney-general (AG) Mohamed Apandi Ali and his decision not to press charges against Prime Minister Najib Razak.

Seri Delima assemblyperson RSN Rayer is referring to the Bar’s plan to table a motion to seek Apandi’s removal at its AGM and the application for judicial review to challenge the AG’s decision not to prefer charges against Najib in relation to the RM2.6 billion donation.

Rayer, who is also a lawyer, said he personally felt the two issues have tainted the position of the Bar as a professional regulatory body for advocates and solicitors in Malaysia into a partisan organisation which is pro-opposition and anti-government.

“The Bar Council is urged to withdraw this action for a judicial review as it will not meet the legal pre-requisites as the Bar Council is not aggrieved by this decision of the attorney-general who decided not to prefer charges against the Prime Minister.

“It seems to me that this action of the (Malaysian) Bar Council has drawn wide criticism as being a busybody and further fuelled speculation that the Bar is now very pro-opposition and anti-government, although I personally do not subscribe to this misconception as I think the Bar still upholds law and justice in this country,” he said in a statement today.

The Malaysian Bar is holding its AGM in Kuala Lumpur tomorrow.

Rayer said Apandi Ali is the Attorney General and Article 145 of the Federal Constitution gives him the power to decide on all matters related to prosecution.

He added that moving a motion to call for his resignation or removal at the Bar AGM may not be the legally correct thing to do.

“It is wrong for the Bar Council to propose and debate a motion calling for the removal of the newly appointed AG when it is legally and constitutionally clear that the appointment of the AG is the prerogative of the Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister.

“I urge the Bar Council to abort debating this motion because the Bar cannot be seen to be doing something for the sake of doing something, although it may not have any legal impact lest we want to be the laughing stock of the entire nation,” he added.

https://m.malaysiakini.com/news/334353

Right of AG

A. perkara 143/5 give the AG right to resign , and the right is absolute for the AG to decide for himself without having to do it for others demand.

B. no other entity can use the 143/5 right for AG to apply pressure the AG to resign.

C.the 143/5 wasnt meant for other parties than the AG himself

Other parties cannot and must not use 143/5 as a reason to demand the AG resignation.

D.whoever use any fed cons law for the ag and ydp agong for their interest are deemed to insult the ydp agong and challenge the fed cons.

145/3 clearly a prerogative privillage granted for the ag himself and not for other than him.

E.143/5 is an absolute right of the ag , no one should use the right  to demand for his resignation.

TMX

http://m.themalaymailonline.com/what-you-think/article/malaysian-bars-bid-to-seek-removal-of-ag-an-exercise-in-futility-kamarul-za

http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/malaysian-bar-agm-motion-seeking-ags-removal-likely-subjudice-muslim-lawyer

http://m.themalaymailonline.com/malaysia/article/show-us-what-ag-did-wrong-in-najib-cases-bn-man-tells-malaysian-bar

https://www.bnbbc.my/parlimen-tolak-usul-undi-tidak-percaya-terhadap-ag/

Dear fellow lawyers,

There has been much discussion concerning the Motion on the Attorney General that will be discussed in the upcoming Malaysian Bar AGM. [You can view the full motion in the Malaysian Bar website..]

Relevant facts:-

1 - The Motion dated 8/3/2016, was received by the Bar on 9/3/2016.
2 - We did not know that the Malaysian Bar was going to file a case regarding the Attorney General, which was done on 15/3/2016 > I personally do not understand why it was done then, 4 days before our AGM, and having note that a Motion existed. Time bar for filing a Judicial Review is 3 months, the AG's decision was on 26/1/2016 - in short, it could very easily been filed after the AGM.

SUBJUDICE - Well, in a recent Malaysian case, Syarikat Bekalan Air Selangor Sdn Bhd V. Fadha Nur Ahmad Kamar & Anor, YA, Mohamad Ariff Yusof J[2012] 6 CLJ 93, this very question was considered... It is NOT subjudice, either was Freedom of Expression, Opinion...takes precedence of matters of public interest, and/or public concern.

'..matter of general public interest of this kind is not to be stifled merely because there is litigation pending arising out of the particular facts to which general principles discussed would be applicable. If the arousing of public opinion by this kind of discussion has the indirect effect of bringing pressure to bear on a particular litigant to abandon or settle a pending action, this must be borne because of the greater public interest in upholding freedom of discussion on matters of general public concern...."

Hence, this motion on the AG, which is really is looking at a much broader reforms that are needed...taking also into consideration the relevant duties of the AG, as provided in the Federal Constitution, and noting also 'competing' responsibilities exist. How can an AG prosecute, when he also acts as advisor of the investigated/accused > which role is more important?A choice too will make him 'guilty' of not performing his other role properly?

The motion deals with the INDEPENDENCE of the AG and prosecutors - suggesting that he should not be getting monetary gain from other sources, and/or holding positions of Directorship in legal entities (Our AG is Director of Lembaga Tabung Haji??).

We have, in the past deliberated and voiced out about the Judiciary, Judicial and Legal Officers, Police, etc - and, now it is our duty to consider AG/Public Prosecutor and Prosecutors?

Is Appandi Ali personally guilty of any wrongdoing? Well, he was appointed by the Yang Di Pertuan Agung on the advise of the Prime Minister - and we know that the King has little choice but to listen to the PM.

Note also Art. 143(2) 

(2) It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to advise the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet or any Minister upon such legal matters, and to perform such other duties of a legal character, as may from time to time be referred or assigned to him by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the Cabinet,...

Well, it could be said that all (if not most of what he did) was what was required of him pursuant t0 Art 143(2)...but then, we need to look at Art 143(3) being his prosecutorial powers...

The call for Apandi Ali to resign, as such is not for any wrongdoing per se, but rather for the good of Malaysia, public perception, etc.. [We did not call for the Yang DiPertuan Agung to remove him, or for the PM to advise the YDP Agung to remove Apandi Ali...]

Note Article 143(5) which states, amongst others, '...the Attorney General shall hold office during the pleasure of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and may at any time resign his office...', as such, he can himself resign...and this is what we are calling him to consider and do...

A Bernama Report dated 15/3/2015 -
 

"berkata cadangan Badan Peguam Malaysia meminta Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali meletak jawatan sebagai Peguam Negara samalah seperti mencabar prerogatif diraja Yang di-Pertuan Agong."

It is certainly not a challenge of the royal prerogative of the YDP Agung as the right for Apandi Ali to himself resign is provided for in our Federal

Mahathir, two others, sue Najib for ‘abuse of power’

Ho Kit Yen | March 23, 2016

In their statement of claim, the trio said that they are among the rightful beneficiaries to take the action against the Prime Minister.

KUALA LUMPUR: Former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad and two vocal critics of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak, Khairuddin Abu Hassan and Anina Saaidudin, filed a suit on Wednesday over claims of abuse of power in office.

In their statement of claim, the trio said that they are among the rightful parties to take the action against the Prime Minister.

They also stated the chronology dated back to March 2015 on the 1MDB investigations, the formation of a special Task Force, to then Attorney General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail’s dismissal, and former Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin’s sacking. Muhyiddin was also denied the right to speak during last year Umno Annual General Assembly.

[Read about the dismissal in previous postings' comments and investigation here, here and here]

“We say that the chronology of facts leads to the irresistible and undeniable conclusion on the manner in which Najib has continuously interfered with the due process of the law in order to ensure that all the relevant authorities could not continue to carry out, and conclude the necessary investigations pertaining to his alleged misconduct over RM2.6 billion donation and RM42 million from SRC International,” the statement said.

They added they were directly affected by Najib actions. “Mahathir had attended Bersih 4, where he made a statement criticizing Najib. He was thus under police investigation for criminal defamation.”

“He has also been in the spotlight by the police for his blog post on current Attorney-General Mohd Apandi Ali,” their statement said.

For Khairuddin, he has been making police reports in Europe and Asia on 1MDB allegations. He was charged with senior lawyer Matthias Chang for attempting to sabotage the country’s banking and financial system while in the case of Anina, she was sacked from Umno because she took legal action against Najib last year.

Their lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla filed the lawsuit today at the Kuala Lumpur High Court this morning. “The writ of summons will be served on the Prime Minister’s solicitors (Hafarizam Wan and Aisha Mubarak) by this week,” he said.

[ANSARA Pashtun lawyer confirm Geng Loceng presence and drama]

They are seeking a declaration that Najib had abused his official position as the country’s leader and Umno president by deliberately obstructing investigations on 1MDB, RM42 million from SRC International and the RM2.6 billion donation.

Besides that Mahathir, Khairuddin and Anina are also seeking a declaration that their constitutional rights were obstructed because Najib had been “punishing” them for merely exercising their rights to ask questions and seek answers to matters pertaining to 1MDB, the RM2.6 billion donation and RM42 million. The trio are also compelling Najib to pay the government the RM2.6 billion and RM42 million.

Khairuddin was charged last year with Chang, Mahathir’s former secretary, for attempting to sabotage the banking and financial services of Malaysia. They were said to have committed the “act” in various countries such as France, England, Switzerland, Hong Kong and Singapore between June 28 and August 26.

[Read back past postinghereclaiming Khairuddin and Chang made no reports at few centres but merely doing photoshoot] 

The prosecution attempted to try them under Sosma or Security Offences (Special Measures) 2012. On 18 November 2015 the High Court ruled that the attempting sabotage charge against them under Section 124L of the Penal Code did not fall under the constitutional ambit of Security Offences (Special Measures) 2012 or Sosma.

Anina had on August last year sued Najib and Umno Executive Secretary Rauf Jusoh, seeking that Najib return the RM2.6 billion “donation” that was deposited into his personal account. She claimed that he had breached the Umno Constitution, the provisions of the Societies Act 1966 and his common law duties as a trustee.

The suit was struck out by the High Court on December 31 last year. Anina then filed an appeal. Because of the lawsuit, she was also expelled from Umno. Her attempt to challenge her sacking has also failed.

Statement by Minister of Communications and Multimedia

23 March 2016

Tun Mahathir's latest action demonstrates how desperate he is. He is clutching at straws. ‎
‎

Tun Mahathir tried to topple the Prime Minister through UMNO. He failed. Tun Mahathir tried a parliamentary vote of no confidence. He failed. ‎Now Tun Mahathir is trying to sue. His accusations are false, so he will fail yet again.

‎
Tun Mahathir has run out of options. This action shows that he has no political channels left. ‎

‎
Datuk Seri Panglima Dr Salleh Said Keruak
Minister of Communications and Multimedia

“If you want to sue, you need to have locus standi. If you want to sue the prime minister as a private citizen, means there is no locus standi. The one that can sue is someone who feels he has been wronged.

“Let the courts decide but to me, he doesn’t have locus standi. What he is doing as a political gimmick only,” he told reporters at the lobby of the Dewan Rakyat today.

“Locus standi” is a legal Latin term which translates to “place to stand”, which refers to whether a party has a right to be heard in court.

His frustration made him man-possessed, till the point that he decided to take on Prime Minister Najib on all his allegations of 1MDB which include the ‘USD620million donation by a Saudi Royal Family”, was linked to the strategic investment corporation of the Malaysian Government.

This desperation is reflective in some of the staunchest supporters of Tun Dr. Mahathir in the Anti-Najib Campaign, who one time was a much respected GEIC of a very important media group to resort to posting of fake Time magazine cover on his social media account.

This is politics never seen in modern Malaysian history, especially by a party which will be celebrating its 70th anniversary in less than seven weeks and had been in power continuously for over 61 years.

Read on here.  

Zeti: We are pursuing actions against 1MDB

By Tan Choe Choe & Gho Chee Yuan / The Edge Financial Daily   | March 24, 2016 : 8:53 AM MYT 

Zeti: It will not result in a court action; it is for breaches under the rules and regulations under the bank’s purview. Photo by Suhaimi Yusuf

KUALA LUMPUR: The central bank is in the midst of pursuing appropriate “administrative enforcement actions” against 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) for failing to substantiate the reasons it gave as to why it could not repatriate a sum of US$1.83 billion (RM7.34 billion) it invested overseas.

Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) Governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz said this yesterday after revealing that the bank had requested for the controversial state-owned strategic investment fund to submit documentary evidence in October last year to substantiate its claim that the remainder of the sum not spent by the fund had been earmarked for a debt asset swap arrangement.

“At this stage, we have yet to receive that. The date [for the submission] has expired. As a result, we are now in the process of pursuing appropriate administrative enforcement actions that are allowed under the laws,” she told a media briefing on the bank’s 2015 annual report. However, she did not say when the deadline is.

The move could possibly result in a penalty or compound, she added. However, the proposed administrative enforcement actions, which will be submitted to the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) before Zeti’s tenure ends, are subject to endorsement by the AGC.

“This is different from criminal action. It will not result in a court action; it is for breaches under the rules and regulations under the bank’s purview,” she said, referring to the bank’s earlier recommendation to the AGC to initiate criminal prosecution against 1MDB for breaches under the Exchange Control Act 1953 (ECA), which was turned down by the AGC despite the bank’s appeal for a review.

Zeti also promised to resolve this issue with 1MDB before she hands over the reins to her successor. “It happened during my term in office and I would like to hand over a clean slate to the next governor.”

Asked if 1MDB’s issue would be one of the regrets that mar her term with the central bank if it is not resolved, she said: “I would like to have a high degree of confidence that the matter would be resolved.”

The AGC in September last year cleared 1MDB officials of any wrongdoing with regard to the investigation carried out by BNM, and directed that no further action should be taken. Following that, BNM had requested for a review of its decision, but the AGC held firm on the grounds that there was no new evidence.

Subsequently, the central bank revoked three permissions granted to 1MDB under the ECA for investments abroad totalling US$1.83 billion, saying that the fund had obtained permission required under the ECA for 1MDB’s investments abroad based on inaccurate or incomplete disclosure of information.

It also issued a directive to 1MDB to repatriate the sum to Malaysia and to submit a plan for that. 1MDB then said the sum had been spent or earmarked for debt settlement arrangements. The money was originally for equity and loan investments in a joint venture with oil company PetroSaudi International Ltd between 2009 and 2011.

BNM was previously part of a joint special task force headed by former attorney-general Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, which was probing allegations made by The Wall Street Journal that funds originating from 1MDB amounting to RM2.6 billion had made their way into Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal accounts.

In an immediate response, 1MDB issued a statement yesterday saying that it had yet to receive any official correspondence or confirmation from BNM “on the specific matters attributed to the governor today (yesterday)”.

“We are therefore unable to comment further. However, we highlight that 1MDB has in the course of the past 12 months fully cooperated to the extent possible with BNM investigations, including providing documentary evidence where available,” it said.

It added that 1MDB is committed to continued cooperation with BNM and will provide any further information that may be required by the central bank if it possesses such information, and if it is possible under the law.

Meanwhile, when asked if she had confirmed to former deputy prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that the US$1.103 billion, which 1MDB invested in the Cayman Islands fund, did not actually go into 1MDB’s accounts in BSI Bank Ltd Singapore, Zeti said she has had many meetings with Muhyiddin in her official capacity, but could not recall the specifics of what was discussed.

“I never had a meeting specifically to discuss that...If I did discuss it with him (Muhyiddin), it should be more broadly and [about] what was happening. That was quite some time ago.

“As far as 1MDB is concerned, what we are doing now is relating to the three approvals that we gave. That is the follow-up action we have taken and it is not related to what you are referring to. What you are referring to, the AGC has concluded the case already,” she added.

Najib, who is also finance minister, told Parliament last March the US$1.103 billion was brought back, but kept in BSI Bank, Singapore. But two months later, the finance ministry issued a correction to its March written reply, saying the US$1.103 billion transferred by 1MDB from Cayman Islands to Singapore was money “redeemed” in the form of assets in US dollars.

Later, Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Husni Hanadzlah clarified that the assets were in fact in the form of “units”, but the explanation added to the confusion when he refused to explain what it meant.

Muhyiddin told a news portal on Tuesday he had asked Zeti if it was true that the money had not gone into the BSI account, adding that Zeti had confirmed that to him.

Thursday, 24 March 2016

‘I will resolve 1MDB issue’

by Cecilia Kok

KUALA LUMPUR: Bank Negara’s outgoing governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz has promised to use her remaining 38 days in office to resolve the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) issue before handing over the reins to her successor.

“I want closure on the 1MDB case, as I want the new governor to start with a clean slate ... and not have to deal with the matter that happened during my time,” Zeti said.

Read in full with the video of the press conference here.

1MDB yet to receive official notification
1MDB notes media reports this evening on certain statements in relation to 1MDB, attributed to the Governor of Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM).

1MDB has not yet received any official correspondence or confirmation from BNM on the specific matters attributed to the Governor today. We are, therefore, unable to comment further.

However, we highlight that 1MDB has in the course of the past 12 months, fully cooperated to the extent possible with BNM investigations, including providing documentary evidence where available.

1MDB is committed to continued cooperation with BNM and will provide any further information that may be required by BNM, to the extent that 1MDB has in its possession or is possible under the law.

1MDB earlier today completed the sale of its Edra energy assets sale to CGN Group. We trust that this significant milestone and the associated debt reduction will not be overshadowed by the comments attributed to the Governor of BNM.

We further highlight that 1MDB remains focused on its rationalisation plan, the positive benefit of which was commented on by the ratings agency Moody’s today.

This success has been achieved in spite of the calculated efforts of detractors, to generate negative headlines in the face of positive developments.

CREC labur RM8.13b di Bandar Malaysia - Berita Harian

China Railway Group to invest RM813 billion to build regional centre in Bandar Malaysia - NST

fRM160b value seen for Bandar Malaysia project @ Rakyat Post

China Railway's US$2 Billion Investment In Bandar Malaysia Will Lead To More FDIs, Says Najib - BERNAMA

WHY DID CHINA CHOOSE MALAYSIA

Diplomatic relations between China and Malaysia are now in their 40th year, and both governments have said they regard their mutual friendship as special. In 1974, Malaysia became the first country in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) to establish diplomatic relations with China.

Last October, China and Malaysia agreed to raise bilateral ties to a “comprehensive strategic partnership”, with a focus on boosting the economic.

Although Malaysia is China’s largest Asean trading partner, While Malaysian exports to China remain dominated by agricultural products, such as palm oil, Chinese firms are strengthening their presence in the technological sector as well as in cultural initiatives.

In Kuala Lumpur’s view, China’s path to become the world’s largest economy is inevitable within the next two decades, and it is in Malaysia’s best interest to cement strong business ties with China early.

The Chinese government has indicated its desire to move away from its current economic model of fast growth at any cost to more “smart” economic growth, which seeks to reduce reliance on energy-intensive and high-polluting industries and rely more on high technology, green energy, and services.

Fortunately, China Railway Group Ltd. announced Monday it plans to open a $2 billion regional center in a transport hub in Kuala Lumpur that it hopes will give it an edge over rivals for a coveted contract for a high-speed rail linking the Malaysian capital and Singapore.

The president, Zhang Zong Yan, said China’s state-owned company, a Global Fortune 500 company which was ranked 71st in 2015, would consolidate all its current regional businesses and operations once its new headquarters in Bandar Malaysia was completed. Bandar Malaysia would serve as the country’s gateway to the world through the planned high-speed rail (HSR) to Singapore and the Pan Asean Rail Transit to Bangkok.

The Prime Minister of Malaysia said CREC’s plan to build its regional centre in Malaysia would be a major boost to the domestic economy, and would attract more international players to relocate their headquarters here. It would create the demand for high-powered talent and effectively help stem Malaysia’s brain drain to other countries as well.

Chinese Ambassador to Malaysia Dr Huang Huikang,  also applauded the Prime Minister’s vision and determination to attract prominent global partners to set up regional offices in Bandar Malaysia. He believed that there will be more Chinese investments and iconic projects in cooperation with China in the years to come under the leadership of Dato’ Sri Najib Razak.

CREC’s announcement comes three months after its successful bid, with its Malaysian partner Iskandar Waterfront Holdings, to acquire a 60% stake in the Bandar Malaysia project from 1MDB Real Estate at the cost of RM7.41bil. CREC's faith and confidence in the Malaysian economy remain strong and both the World Bank and the IMF have applauded Malaysia’s approach in the last few months.

Dear Malaysians, instead of condemning the leadership of our prime minister, let us be grateful and enjoy the dedicated space for financial and commercial centres, tourism and shopping facilities, high-end corporate offices, theme park and themed theatres in future because we can expect a modern metropolis with high quality living and good connectivity.

Thank you .
Farah Hanim Ismail
22/3/2016

 While former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad's lawsuit against his successor Najib Abdul Razak has caused a sensation, lawyers are pessimistic about the outcome of the suit.

Lawyer New Sin Yew said the suit will ultimately fail because Najib is not considered a public officer under the law.

“One element of the tort of misfeasance of public office is it must be shown that Najib is a public officer. He is not,” he told Malaysiakini in an e-mail yesterday.

He explained that the Interpretation Act of 1948 and 1967 defines public office as “an office in any of the public services”.

Article 132(3)(a) of the federal constitution defines 'public services' in a way that excludes any member of the administration of the federation or the state, which in turn means ministers, deputy ministers and other posts under Article 160 of the constitution.

“Najib is a minister, but ministers are not considered a public officer.

“Therefore, the suit will fail,” New said, when asked about the suit filed yesterday.

Mahathir, former Langkawi Wanita Umno member Anina Saadudin, and former Batu Kawan Umno division vice-chairperson Khairuddin Abu Hassan are plaintiffs in the suit.

In the suit, the sole defendant Najib is accused of breaching his fiduciary duty and misfeasance in public office, by compromising various investigations against him in relation to the 1MDB scandal.

Misfeasance is a legal term referring to actions that are legal but performed improperly.

Meanwhile, lawyer Andrew Khoo opined that proving sufficient locus standi would be an issue in the case.

Locus standi refers to whether a party has sufficient grounds to bring a case against another.

Khoo said the plaintiffs would have to show the court that they have been especially affected by Najib's alleged malfeasance compared to the general population, including other taxpayers and Umno members.

“So when the court considers the issue of locus standi, it would have to see what specific interests he has, as opposed to any other ordinary person (to decide) whether or not to allow his suit,” he said.

He said insufficient locus standi is often among the first objections raised by the defendants in cases against the government, especially Najib.

But Khoo added that the court should take on a more relaxed view of the concept in public interest litigation.

“It is a question for the court as to whether they want to be more liberal in interpreting the concept of locus standi (in public interest cases),” he told Malaysiakini last night.

https://m.malaysiakini.com/news/335027

Despite having the leftist with him, could he not have a better team of lawyers?

I'll never be your beast of burden
My back is broad but it's a hurting
All I want is for you to make love to me
I'll never be your beast of burden
I've walked for miles my feet are hurting
All I want is for you to make love to me
Am I hard enough
Am I rough enough
Am I rich enough

I'm not too blind to see
I'll never be your beast of burden
So let's go home and draw the curtains
Music on the radio
Come on baby make sweet love to me
Am I hard enough
Am I rough enough
Am I rich enough

I'm not too blind to see
Oh little sister
Pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, girl
You're a pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty, pretty girl
Pretty, pretty
Such a pretty, pretty, pretty girl
Come on baby please, please, please
I'll tell ya
You can put me out
On the street
Put me out
With no shoes on my feet
But, put me out, put me out
Put me out of misery
Yeah, all your sickness
I can suck it up
Throw it all at me
I can shrug it off
There's one thing baby
That I don't understand
You keep on telling me
I ain't your kind of man
Ain't I rough enough, ooh baby
Ain't I tough enough
Ain't I rich enough, in love enough
Ooh! Ooh! Please
I'll never be your beast of burden
I'll never be your beast of burden
Never, never, never, never, never, never, never be
I'll never be your beast of burden
I've walked for miles and my feet are hurting
All I want is you to make love to me
I don't need beast of burden
I need no fussing
I need no nursing
Never, never, never, never, never, never, never be

Yesterday's ABC documentary; 'Four Corners': State of Fear" done by the two Australians who tried to ambush Najib going into the mosque in Sarawak aired on TV - including in Malaysia.

The documentary recycled a bunch of old allegations including Altantuya/scorpene and any blind person can see that it seems to propaganda that is purpose built to paint as bad a picture as they can on PM Najib.

This basically ignores the fact that Altantuya's murder went thru three court trials and PM was never implicated in this trial.

But what is new is that Mahathir admitted that he had talked to convicted murderer Sirul supposedly to "help him get asylum" in the Australia. Mahathir claimed he asked for nothing in return!

Yeah right, we believe you that Mahathir is now an immigration lawyer and can help Sirul and expecting nothing in return.

No wonder Sirul had made a series of video "confession" claiming that certain high profile leaders had asked Sirul to unfairly frame Najib in return for certain favours.

Mahathir has admitted to talking to Sirul and I believe PDRM should investigate Sirul and Mahathir if there was conspiracy by Mahathir to frame Najib by promising freedom for Sirul.

The fact that 4 Corners still tried to blame Kevin Morais' murder on Najib on the pretext that he was investigating Najib's RM2.6b is also astounding as his murder has now gone to trial with seven suspects.

Also, I cannot understand why they would want to take out Kevin Morais who was not even working on this case when the rest of the investigation team including the ex-AG is still around - it makes no sense.

And what happened to the so-called pen-drive full of evidence that Kevin's brother said he has and threatened to review 6 months ago?

Can't you just drop the contents of the pen-drive into Google Drive and send us the link? What decade are you living in?

Clare said the charge sheet was a smoking gun but it blew open a set-up by Gani Patail

Also, the 4 corners program said that ex-AG Gani, who was in communication with ex-DPM Muhyiddin, was about to file charges against Najib just before he was replaced.

It is simply beyond belief that these journalist would even dare run this story knowing full well that the MACC investigation papers on Najib was not even completed and sent to the AG Office for further actions.

Heck! Najib, the so-called main suspect was not even questioned yet so how can the investigations be completed?

And if investigations are not completed and the file not sent to the AG for further action, how can charges be filed?

The fake charge sheet shows CSR Manager being charged? He know nuts on the fund raising

Surely experienced journalists know this.

In fact, are we to believe that MACC and the AG's effectiveness and efficiency has reached an entirely new level where investigations started on July 3rd 2015 would mean charges by July 27th 2015?

That would be incredible speed of our legal system - never seen before and seen since.

It either points to a high-level conspiracy to frame or the entire ex-AG story is not credible - especially since our ex-AG himself have not said a word about this.

However, the program did indeed have a new revelation

Thought the guy looks like a make-up Matthias Chang

Their crew had been apparently shown the bank documents by an unnamed 'high-level source'.

“The banking documents reveal an extraordinary and steady flow of money between 2011 and 2014,”

Among others, US$75 million came from a Saudi prince, while another US$80 million came from the Saudi Arabia's Ministry of Finance.

A further US$120 million supposedly came from an unnamed British Virgin Islands shell company.

The documentary also listed two transactions in March 2013 that supposedly came from another BVI company, totalling US$681 million. This is the often-reported RM2.6 billion political donation.

The total received by Najib, according to the documentary, was US$1.03 billion (RM4.14 billion) by April 10, 2013 - just over a month prior to the 13th general election.

Now why would the Saudi Ministry of Finance send money directly to Najib's accounts?

This is significant as this is no longer just a transfer from individuals in the Royal family but the actual Saudi Arabia Govt itself.

That Saudi MOF transfer is just one of the 4 transactions.

Do remember that MACC said they had interviewed the donor who confirmed that all 4 transactions were from Saudi and was a political contribution.

MACC had long ago said they have 4 letters for the four transfers lodged at the time of transfer - all from the same person. This means that the donor was sending funding to Najib via different accounts and sources - which is not unusual as you would expect the Saudi country and Royal family to have money all over the world and kept there for confidentiality purposes.

Which means the person who lodged the letter for the transfer from the Saudi Ministry of Finance was also the same person who lodged the letter for the 2013 RM2.6b transfer - which WSJ had claimed Najib had returned most of the money right after GE13.

And is this why Najib and our government does not want to reveal too much information on the deals?

That this is an official Saudi Govt covert initiative and it is not right for Najib and Malaysia to disclose other countries covert initiatives?

Is this also why the foreign media seems obsessed on this issue to find out how Saudi Arabia funds other countries and is trying to get an admission?

All in all, this 4 corners programme looks and fells like an exercise in planned propaganda to paint PM Najib as black as they can.

In fact, they interviewed all those politicians and NGOs who are known to be anti-Najib but did not interview anyone who is pro-Najib nor anyone who would be seen as neutral - which goes against the very essence of balanced reporting.

Saya rasa bukan soal orang yang menyokong itu makan dedak tapi ini soal orang yang menentang itu tidak dapat makan dedak.

Sorry can't find the WSJ clipping

STATEMENT ON THE WALL STREET JOURNAL
BY THE PRIME MINISTER’S PRESS SECRETARY

Today, for the first time, the Wall Street Journal has been forced to admit that at least some of the funds donated to the Prime Minister came from Saudi Arabia.

For nearly a year, the WSJ denied that the funds came from Saudi Arabia, and attacked all those who suggested otherwise.

This included the Attorney General who, after reviewing the exhaustive investigations and examining all the evidence – including wire transfers and interviews with the Royal Family – confirmed that the funds were a donation from the Royal Family of Saudi Arabia.

Neither the confirmation from lawful Malaysian authorities, nor the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia, nor reputable outlets such as the BBC and Daily Telegraph, was enough to make the WSJ stop their attacks or denials that any of the funds had come from Saudi Arabia.

This exposed the bias in the WSJ's reporting, and made clear that their coverage was not driven by an impartial desire to cover the facts. Instead, their reporting was based on false information they were willingly fed by Tun Mahathir's Anti-Najib Campaign.

Maybe it's their embarrassment that stops them accepting the facts in full. Namely, as the Prime Minister has always maintained, the funds were a donation from Saudi Arabia – as the evidence shows.

However, today is a small step towards the WSJ admitting that they have been wrong all along – and that they were wrong to base their reporting on unnamed and anonymous sources who have never been revealed and may not even exist.

DATUK SERI TENGKU SARIFFUDDIN
PRESS SECRETARY TO THE PRIME MINISTER

Nazir 'received, then disbursed funds from Najib's bank account', says WSJ

Shannon Teoh  Malaysia Bureau Chief In Kuala Lumpur

Prominent banker Nazir Razak, who has been critical of the state of Malaysia's institutions and politics, has found himself embroiled in a financial scandal swirling around his brother, Prime Minister Najib Razak.

The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported that Datuk Seri Nazir received US$7 million (S$9.4 million) transferred into his account from his older brother's, and the money was then disbursed to Umno politicians ahead of the 2013 General Election.

The newspaper said that Mr Nazir, who was chief executive of CIMB at the time, confirmed in a statement that the money was distributed in accordance with instructions from party leaders. He also said he believed the money was from donations he helped to raise from Malaysian companies and individuals for the election.

"I had no knowledge whatsoever that these funds may have originated from any other source," he said in the statement. "The entire amount was paid out in cash to various recipients according to the instructions of the party president, and the account was closed with a zero balance."

The WSJ article centred on allegations that money from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) was used by Datuk Seri Najib, the state investor's advisory chief, for both political and personal purposes.

1MDB has denied the allegations, while Mr Najib has insisted that US$681 million found in his personal accounts was a donation from the Saudi royal family "to be used as the Prime Minister saw fit".

The Prime Minister's Office accused the WSJ of bias yesterday, saying in a statement that the newspaper's position has shifted to "admit that at least some of the funds" came from Saudi Arabia.

Mr Nazir's involvement in the disbursement of political funds has drawn surprise. Since becoming CIMB chairman in 2014, he has been vocal about national issues. He has slammed 1MDB and called for its board to resign, while bemoaning the state of the country that his brother has governed since 2009.

Last June, he announced plans to launch a non-governmental organisation with former deputy minister Saifuddin Abdullah to champion moderate views. "I just can't see how our institutions can recover, how our political atmosphere can become less toxic, how our international reputation can be repaired," he had said in February.

Datuk Saifuddin, who left Umno last October, told The Straits Times he was quite surprised by the WSJ report, as he was unaware that Mr Nazir had been involved in disbursing party funds, although raising money to help politicians is a normal practice.

Malaysia's integrity minister Paul Low, who heads a newly established committee to recommend regulations on political funding, made it clear that such activities were "not regulated at all".

He said: "This is precisely why we need regulations to distinguish (between) what are political funds and what are not, and if it is political, then we must ensure full disclosure."

A top finance executive familiar with political funding told The Straits Times that "as CEO of a major bank, I wouldn't do it, because now you are tarnished".

"I understand wanting to help (Mr Nazir helping his brother), but admitting you helped raise funds will lead people to assume it came from your clients because every big guy in town was his client. It raises the question of 'fit and proper'. Putting it in your personal account also seems careless," he said.

Mr Nazir did not specify the individuals the money was disbursed to, or why his personal account was used. CIMB officials have not responded to queries.

Adding to 1MDB's woes, Luxembourg's state prosecutor has launched an inquiry into allegations of money laundering by 1MDB in 2012 and 2013, Reuters said yesterday.

The prosecutor said there was evidence that funds held by the Malaysian government in offshore accounts in Singapore, Switzerland and Luxembourg had been misused, it said.

"I had no knowledge whatsoever that these funds may have originated from any other source," he said in the statement.

"The entire amount was paid out in cash to various recipients according to the instructions of the party president, and the account was closed with a zero balance."

Najib: National Autism Centre An Investment For The Country

Published on Friday, 01 April 2016 08:42

KUALA LUMPUR: Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak said yesterday he is confident the establishment of the Permata Kurnia national autism centre will be an investment in the provision of early intervention for children with autism.

He said the approach and alternative methods of early intervention for children with autism would be able to reduce the cost of care for a lifetime.

“Early intervention can reduce the cost of care that the country has to bear. I am convinced that this is an investment for the country, not an expenditure,” he said when opening the Permata Kurnia Centre in Sentul here.

Najib’s wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, who is patron of the Permata programme, Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Rohani Abdul Karim and Chief Secretary to the Government Tan Sri Dr Ali Hamsa were also present at the event.

The Prime Minister said the centre provided full-time service for children four to six years of age as a transition to prepare them for mainstream education.

He said he would be proud if children with autism could attend normal school as it would not pose a burden to their parents, and the children would have the opportunity to excel.

Najib said that in the United States, for example, the number of children with autism was 1.5 million and the lifetime cost of care per child was estimated at US$3.2 million (about RM12.3 million).

The RM28-million Permata Kurnia Centre in Sentul cares for about 300 children, having started operations in December last year.

The Prime Minister said Permata had expanded to seven programmes since it was introduced in 2006 and won international recognition. It has been nominated for the Global Good Governance Children’s Awards in the 3G Children’s Welfare Awards category in London.

Permata would compete with the programmes of three other countries, namely Qatar, the United Kingdom and India, he said.

Najib expressed the hope that the autism centre would spread its wings to the states with teachers dedicated to bringing up successful children.

— Bernama

Is this going to be the end of Najib? Are we going to see Mukhriz closer to the office of the Prime Minister? (Dato) Kadir (Jasin) told his friends that this month of April is the final month for Najib. 

First it was July 2015, then August, then September, then October, then November, then December. And now it is supposed to be April 2016.

But why the hurry?

If it is true that if Najib remains Prime Minister then Barisan Nasional and Umno are going to get kicked out in the next general election in 2018, why not just wait another two years and then Barisan Nasional and Umno will get kicked out and in that same process Najib will get kicked out together with his party?

The first reason is they do not want Barisan Nasional and Umno to get kicked out. “But then Mahathir and the ANC are working with the opposition?” you may ask.

Wrong. Mahathir is not working with the opposition. He is just using the opposition to oust Najib. And the opposition thinks it is using Mahathir instead to kick out Barisan Nasional and Umno.

... the Bank Negara Governor has only about a month to go before she retires. So, if they want to act, they have to do it within this next month. And that was why Kadir said we do not have long to wait to find out what the secret that he is keeping and which he cannot tell us is.

The very next day, Bank Negara issued a press statement denying that allegation. They then lodged a police report and called in their lawyers for a meeting. The plan was they were going to sue me for slander.

According to my fly on the wall in the meeting room, the lawyers advised Bank Negara to sue me only if they have nothing to hide. However, if their hands are not really clean, then they should reconsider the plan to sue me or else it will backfire.

Bank Negara then made a decision to drop the plan to sue me. So what does that tell you? Are their hands clean or dirty?

... on 2nd July 2015, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) ran a story based on what they claim were documents related to an investigation on RM2.6 billion of 1MDB’s money being transferred to Najib’s personal bank account.

Now, the story was published on 2nd July 2015. So they must have received the documents before that, probably in June or even earlier. WSJ said they have seen the documents and the documents are regarding an investigation by Malaysian authorities.

The Attorney General, Gani Patail, in turn said that he received the documents on 4th July 2015. And that was two days after the WSJ report.

And who gave him the documents? Well, Bank Negara, of course. So Gani received the documents two days after WSJ ran the story, according to the official statement.

And then they announced on 8th July 2015 that a Special Task Force is being launched to investigate the WSJ story. So that would mean no investigation has been done yet. It is only being done after 8th July 2015.

So what investigation was WSJ talking about? And which investigation papers are they referring to?

Actually there was no investigation and there were no investigation papers. The investigation did not exist and the investigation papers were fakes. WSJ was duped and they ran a story based on fabricated documents. The investigation started after the WSJ story of 2nd July 2015, after 8th July 2015, in fact.

Then, on 30th March 2016, WSJ ran another story, an updated version. And this time they said the USD700 million is US$1 billion after all and that the money was a donation from the Middle East after all. This time they appear to have got part of the story correct and a story very different from the 2nd July 2015 story.

And in this story of 30th March 2016, just like in the 2nd July 2015 story, WSJ said they have seen the documents and the documents are the investigation papers.

So, two different investigations and two different investigation papers — one report on 2nd July 2015 and the other on 30th March 2016. And WSJ says they are in possession of the documents and have viewed them. The question that needs to be asked, though, is how did they come to be in possession of them?

And that is what the police are trying to establish. The prime suspect is Bank Negara. Someone or some people in Bank Negara gave WSJ fake documents on or around June last year and, last month, gave them another set of different documents.

And someone or some people are going to go to jail for this. And the Bank Negara Governor is pissing in her panties because everything leads to her door. And she has only another month to go: either to go into retirement or to go to jail.

So she has nothing to lose. And when you have nothing to lose you have to go for broke. So she is planning to get Najib before Najib gets her. And that is the secret Kadir is talking about. The Bank Negara Governor wants Najib arrested before she herself gets arrested.

RM2.6 billion (or RM4.2 billion) is not a small amount of money. How could that huge amount come into Malaysia three years ago without triggering any alarms when just RM100,000 would send the alarm bells wailing like a banshee?

Najib first discussed this matter with the Governor and after explaining where the money is coming from and what it is for, the Governor advised Najib to place the money into his personal bank account. It would be less complicated for both Bank Negara and the Registrar of Societies if the money did not go into Umno’s bank account.

The money is not from illegal sources. There is no crime involved. There is no money laundering involved. And the money is not being smuggled into Malaysia. “So just put it into your personal back account,” said Bank Negara.

And that is what the police are going to report. So, if Bank Negara says otherwise, then without a doubt they are trying to set Najib up. And instead of the Bank Negara Governor arresting Najib, she will end up getting arrested instead.

And that, dear readers, is why they are in a hurry to get Najib — because if they delay too long they are going to end up in jail instead. So, Kadir, that is the secret you are keeping which you cannot tell us, right?

Oh, sorry, have I stolen the thunder from you?

IGP urges TV stations to cancel planned Rahman Dahlan-Guan Eng debate

KUALA LUMPUR: Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar has urged all television stations to cancel the proposed live telecast of a debate on the Taman Manggis land issue as the case is under investigation by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

He said if the debate between Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan and Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng was allowed to take place, it would affect the investigations and prejudice the witnesses and the case.

"@PDRMsia agrees with @SPRMMalaysia, the Manggis bungalow debate should be cancelled. Police investigations are still ongoing. Key witnesses, including the Chief Minister have not been called," he said on Twitter on Friday night.

Khalid tweeted: "@PDRMsia asks all TV stations to cancel the live debate before the case is settled."

More here.

Rahman Dahlan-Guan Eng debate postponed

PETALING JAYA: TV3 has postponed the proposed debate between Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan and Lim Guan Eng on the Taman Manggis land issue following advice from the police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

The network, which was originally supposed to televise the debate live on Apr 19, backed down after taking into consideration the views expressed by Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar and MACC’s investigations director Datuk Azam Baki.

“TV3 respects the opinion of Tan Sri Khalid and Datuk Azam that the debate may interfere with the authorities’ investigations on the Taman Manggis land controversy and Lim’s bungalow purchase,” said Media Prima Bhd Group Managing Editor of News & Current Affairs (TV Networks) Datuk Seri Mohd Ashraf Abdullah.

He said a new date for the debate would be announced later.

Read on here.

Bring it on, Arul Kanda tells Pua on 1MDB debate challenge

PETALING JAYA: 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) president and group executive director Arul Kanda Kandasamy has accepted Tony Pua’s challenge to a debate following the conclusion of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigation into the government investment arm.

In a statement on Friday, Arul Kanda questioned the Petaling Jaya Utara MP's remarks calling him a liar and asking him to resign from 1MDB just hours before issuing the debate challenge on Thursday.

“It is clear that YB Tony is confused and contradicts himself. He does not know if he loves me or hates me.

“He says I should resign, then says I need to stay on and debate with him,” he said.

Arul Kanda also said that he hopes Pua, who is a member of the PAC, had consulted the Parliament Speaker before issuing the challenge.

“To avoid being embarrassed a second time, I hope YB Tony has first checked with the Speaker of Parliament before issuing this debate challenge,” he said.

Arul Kanda said that despite questioning him for two full days at the PAC hearing, Pua still wanted “to spend quality time” with him.

“Far be it from me, to deny YB Tony this pleasure.

“I hereby accept the debate challenge. Bring it on!” he said.

On April 7, the 106-page PAC report on 1MDB was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat.

This is the second time Pua has challenged Arul Kanda to a live debate over 1MDB.

Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia had said that to safeguard Parliament’s integrity, Pua should first resign from the PAC if he wanted to debate with Arul Kanda.

The Star

1MDB says unsettled interest payment due to dispute with IPIC

Published: April 18, 2016 06:46 PM GMT+8

KUALA LUMPUR, April 18 — 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) today admitted that an interest payment due to its bondholders today has not been made due to a dispute between the state investment fund and Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC).

“A dispute has recently arisen between IPIC and the Issuer concerning, among other things, the Issuer’s obligations to IPIC and IPIC’s corresponding obligations

“Consequently, at the time of the settlement, the Issuer understands IPIC has not paid the interest,” 1MDB said in a statement.

The bond interest payments due is for US$50 million for US US$1.75 billion bonds issued by 1MDB’s energy arm 1MDB Energy (Langat) Limited.

But the firm stressed that it would be able to meet all other financial obligations.

“1MDB wishes to make it clear that it and its group entities will meet all of their other obligations under any other financing arrangements and have ample liquidity to do so,” it said.

According to Reuters, IPIC said today that a June agreement to provide financial support to 1MDB had been terminated after the firm failed to meet obligations to the Abu Dhabi fund.

IPIC said in a bourse filing in London the Malaysian state fund and the Ministry of Finance had failed to meet obligations including to pay US$1.1 billion plus interest and was now in default.

While the obligations of IPIC and its subsidiary, Aabar Investments, under the June agreement had now been terminated, the Abu Dhabi fund still expected the Malaysian side to honour its commitments.

IPIC said it was now considering all its options to remedy the default, including referring the matter to the appropriate dispute resolution forum.

Under the June agreement, IPIC agreed to provide US$1 billion in cash as well as assume US$3.5 billion of 1MDB debt.

It also forgave an undisclosed amount of debt owed to IPIC by 1MDB, in exchange for assets that have not been named.

IPIC to lose more

Lim Sian See made an explanation of the situation in her Facebook. It is reproduced in full below: 

Making sense of the IPIC announcement that it wants to terminate on the Asset-Debt Swap deal with 1MDB.

Today's announcement by IPIC is prompted by a USD50 million (RM190m) coupon payment that is due tomorrow on part of the USD3.5 billion 1MDB bonds that are guaranteed by IPIC. 

After settling off RM14.25 billion worth of loans over the past month after completion of the Edra deal, 1MDB still have RM2.3 billion cash.

This means 1MDB can easily pay the coupon payment but according to the Singapore Straits Times quoting MOF officials, PM Najib had apparently told 1MDB not to pay.

These bonds are not guaranteed directly by the Malaysian govt (which is why it is not part of the RM5.8b govt exposure as per the PAC report) but by IPIC with a back-end guarantee by 1MDB the company.

In the event of the USD3.5b bonds default, they will call the guarantor to make good first. 

If IPIC refuse to make good then the rest of their IPIC bonds which is worth more than all the 1MDB loans will default. 

It's like playing chicken - and IPIC has a lot more to lose if they allow these bonds to default whereas Malaysia's losses are limited.

This means that the likely scenario would be that IPIC will pay up the interest and then sue Malaysia to recover the amount.

However, 1MDB believes they have already transferred all the USD4.5b assets to IPIC/Aabar (these were the assets to be swaped with the USD3.5b + USD1b payment from IPIC) as it was on the direct instructions and with full paperwork by the MD of IPIC, the Chairman and CEO of Aabar as well as the due diligence done by the lawyers and the international auditors since then.

IPIC/Aabar, however believes otherwise and claims they have never received the money - but somehow have agreed to transfer USD1 billion, pay the USD110m interest on the bonds previously and also cancelled the Aabar options even though they claim they have never received all these payments.

These money is not lost but is in dispute. If Najib had songlaped the money, he would have asked for the coupon to be paid instead of stopping 1MDB from doing so.

This means 1MDB believes it has a strong case when it comes to litigation over IPIC.

It's a risky strategy however but I believe that this is the best option for Malaysia to take right now to get the IPIC/Aabar guys to own-up and take responsibility that they have received all these assets.

Timbalan Ketua Pesuruhjaya (Pencegahan) SPRM, Datuk Seri Mustafar Ali, berkata pihaknya sudah mempunyai tindakan serta perancangan untuk memanggil Guan Eng dalam melengkapkan siasatan berhubung kes tersebut.

"Telah ada perancangan dan tindakan, macam mana sekali pun akan dipanggil.

"Bahagian Operasi akan menentukan masa sesuai untuk memanggil beliau (Guan Eng).

More in here.

Miri, Miri
The whole day through
Just an old sweet song
Keeps Miri on my mind

I said Miri
Miri
A song of you
Comes as sweet and clear
As moonlight through the well

Not so much as helping out the Sarawak campaign but merely going there as political tourist.

The Sarawakian know their politics better. Let's not pollute their mind with Semenanjung's nasty and adversarial politics.

An example of a typical anything goes Semenanjung politics is commented by Facebooker Lim Sian See:

This is a post by the total pentaksub of Mahathir blogger Syed Akbar Ali. The blogger who won't even stand up for his past entries and delete them after 1-2 days.

This post is all about sabotaging BN's chances for the Sarawak Elections by disparaging CM Adenan Satem.

These are the kind of political prostitutes that we have. All for the taksub and the money and if Mahathir cannot control UMNO-BN then no one can and they must lost in any elections.

It is very clear here that if Mahathir's men can try to sabotage BN in the Sarawak elections, they will sabotage BN in GE14 too.

Extremely bitter and selfish people.

If they can't have it, no one else can.

---

http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.my/2016/04/umnos-backdoor-entry-into-sarawak-will.html

Surprised that Apanama did not educate him on Sarawak politics. It was hardly an intelligent smart spin. Sounded naive instead.

Maybe related and maybe not to the above, but most likely is, Rocky Bru posted about the following:

Extract of Klang Kirim's comment is deep with intended target:

Kepada penghasut pen deposit TH, taubatlah. Allah teirma taubat semua, termasuk mualap.

Hentikan nah semua perbuatan menjaja fitnah dengan niat menghasut dan menimbulkan kebencian dan mengapi apikan kemarahan, hanya kerana dibutakan kepda fanatism seseroang yang dalam keadaan obsess untuk menggulingkan PM Najib.

Read in full in Rocky Bru's commentary here.

Anyway, election offers an opportunity to see the people coming out and to hear their concerns, grouses and hope. It is the time to see the real Sarawak, the Malaysia that we in Semenanjung are totally ignorant about and took them for granted.

We talk of Vision 2020 to be a developed country but some of our countrymen are still struggling with the basic necessity of life.

In Semenanjung, we politicise everything. Political quarrels are endless.

Yet despite the shortcomings, our East Malaysian countrymen live in peace and harmony. Not merely tolerable of each other but accepting each others' existence.