Kring kring ...

"Hello ah ... are you ....?"

"Can you introduce yourself. That is only the proper phone ettiquate."

"Oh sorry ... I am XXX (name to be witheld). Saya dapat nombor awak dari ini Dato YYY. Are you itu blogger apa itu nama A Voice ...?
"Selalu saya tidak akan kata ya, tapi lu sudah sebut Dato YYY, saya kata Ya. You must be his friend. His friend can be my friend. Sorry if I sounded rude tadi Dato."

"Takpa ... saya bukan Dato."

"Then I call you uncle"

"Ok Ok ... ada sikit hal mahu cakap."

"Can ... "

"Bagus ... bagus ... lu ingat ka itu murder tahun 2013. Ada one banker Arab mati depan Chinese temple.

"Anak itu banker sudah cakap bukan-bukan. Four years he talk nonsence. He is making it difficult to do business. I know what happen. I want you to write the truth. This guy must be on the take from MMM."

"Info ini macam tak boleh cakap dalam talipon boss. Lets us meet somewhere."

"Lagi bagus. Kita jumpa itu satu kopitiam di Bukit Bintang nama .... 11:30 PM can ah?"

"Anak dia manyak cilaka... Kes sudah habis tapi dia sudah cakap banyak bohong. Macam-macma orang dan reporter overseas datang. Olang ingat kami terlibat tapi tidak. Kami pun susah ....mahu cari makan."

His 45 year old son Pascal Najadi has expressed shock over the murder of his father, and said the irony was that his father was murdered in Malaysia, a country for which his father had so much affection, having called it home for more than four decades.

"I was shocked upon hearing about the killing in Kuala Lumpur, which was carried out in broad daylight," he told Bernama in a telephone interview from Europe.

Pascal, who holds dual Swiss and British citizenship, urged the Malaysian authorities to do its utmost to apprehend the culprits involved in the killing of his 75-year-old father and bring them to justice.

Taken from a blog here.

That late night the "uncle" told us that he did not cooperate with the police. He came to KL but flew off before giving any statement to police.

When asked how he know Pascal did not give any statement, his reply was, "Kita ada jalan  ...."

"Kalau begitu, dia tipu kata dia tidak akan ke Malaysia hingga pembunuh ditangkap." Anyway it is Sarawak Report spin. (Read Wikipedia here) 

Uncle nodded.

When it happened, friends formerly in AMMB said he has been mixing with dubious characters.

Apparently, it is not so. Sin Chew wrote in August 2013 here.

So we asked the "uncle" what was Hussain Najadi doing at the temple before he was murderred.

"Isteri dia semayang temple situ. Masa itu ada satu kepala India mahu masuk itu kawasan Geng ZZZ dan mahu kasi roboh temple. Hussain datang mahu tolong untuk isteri dia."

To dig more, we doubted "uncle." How could a hired professional killer mistaken the identity. Richard must be dark skinned like Kevin and Charles. While Bahrain-born Persian, Hussain is fairly light skinned.

We prayed he will not get angry and blow our head of.

"Wah .. lu pandai tanya soalan. Masa itu Kong See Kwan makan drug. Dia tidak berapa nampak. Hussain yang kena."

"Lu mesti ada orang kasi tahu," we enquired.

He just smiled .....

"Ada orang bayar RM20 ribu ..."

"Baru-baru ini, Sarawak Report (read here) ada tulis Pascal Najadi kata ada orang bayar RM30 juta untuk kasi Hussain Najadi mati."

"Mana ada itu macam manyak ..."

“We are in shock and horror,” Pascal Najadi said from Moscow. “Our security team learned last night from a reliable source that the mastermind assassin Lim Yuen Soo was indeed captured by the Malaysian Police in October 2015. We further had to learn that the Attorney General’s Chambers has subsequently ordered his release. This is not acceptable by any standards. We condemn this and protest in strongest terms.

 

Interesting read here

"The attorneys general of Washington, D.C. (Karl Racine), and Maryland (Brian Frosh) filed a lawsuit in federal court Monday against President Donald Trump, alleging he violated the Constitution by allowing his businesses to accept payments from foreign governments."

... the most salient factor is that when the president is subject to foreign influence, we have to be concerned about whether the actions he's taking — both at home and abroad ... 

“A civil forfeiture complaint is merely an allegation that money or property was involved in or represents the proceeds of a crime. These allegations are not proven until a court awards judgment in favor of the U.S.”

DoJ says its court filings based on reasonable facts

FMT Reporters | June 21, 2017

It warns, though, that people should not conclude that those named in its documents are guilty, or even innocent.

KUALA LUMPUR: The United States Department of Justice (DoJ) said whatever information it has released regarding its 1Malaysia Development Bhd civil lawsuits are based on details that it believes can be upheld in court.

However, it also cautioned that one should not draw any conclusions about the guilt or innocence of anyone simply because they had been named in the documents.

The DoJ told Malaysiakini via email: “The law requires we allege sufficiently detailed facts to establish a reasonable belief that we will prevail at trial.

“This means we have to allege enough facts to show a reasonable belief that United States money laundering and other criminal laws were violated and that the subject assets were involved in or traceable to these illegal transactions.

“In addition, the complaint provides sufficient details to specifically identify the property subject to forfeiture and to clarify the basis of the government’s case should anyone with a valid claim wish to challenge our case. Identifying persons and entities aids that function.”

Malaysiakini said the DoJ was responding to the statement by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Abdul Rahman Dahlan that the DoJ had insinuated at Rosmah Mansor, the prime minister’s wife, by linking her to diamonds allegedly bought using cash misappropriated from 1MDB, even though it had no intention to seize the jewellery.

The DoJ added: “No conclusions should be drawn, one way or another, about the status of individuals or entities simply because they are named in the documents.”

Read the rest of the background part of the report here and also in DOJ website here.

“In addition, the complaint provides sufficient details to specifically identify the property subject to forfeiture and to clarify the basis of the government’s case should anyone with a valid claim wish to challenge our case. Identifying persons and entities aids that function.”

"...  allege enough facts to show a reasonable belief..."

The injustice of U.S. Dept of Justice

RECENTLY, the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) announced the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of about US$540 million (RM2.3 billion) in assets obtained with money allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

By JASON LEONG - July 18, 2017 @ 12:50pm

RECENTLY, the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) announced the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of about US$540 million (RM2.3 billion) in assets obtained with money allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

This was in addition to the US$4 billion civil forfeiture proceedings filed last year.

What is missing from these proceedings is the criminal charge or charges against the perpetrator or perpetrators of the alleged crimes.

The comments made here are not about the facts of the case related to the civil forfeiture proceedings by DoJ against assets obtained with funds allegedly misappropriated from 1MDB, but rather, the focus here is on the injustice created by civil forfeiture laws, which is perpetrated by DoJ.

These civil forfeiture proceedings contravene basic criminal law that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt: the presumption of innocence.

In reality, this law carries the presumption of guilt until proven innocent.

It is exactly the opposite of how most modern justice system should work: your possessions are presumed guilty and you have to prove innocence.

Civil forfeiture rests on the idea that the property itself, not the owner, has violated the law.

It is based on a legal fiction that the property itself is guilty of a crime.

Under this fiction, a proceeding is brought in rem, or against the property itself, instead of in personam, or against the owner.

Since it is based on a legal fiction, its resultant consequences become ridiculous in that property can be guilty of a crime and thereby forfeited to the state regardless of whether any individual person is ever arrested, charged with, and much less convicted of, a crime related to that property.

It goes against legal logic and rational principles of jurisprudence because things or property cannot think, act or harbour criminal intention.

As the accused is an item of property, not a person, the property owner has no right to legal counsel and becomes a third-party claimant.

If owners cannot afford the legal costs to plead that their property is innocent, too bad.

The US law on civil forfeiture threatens and violates the most common constitutional rights afforded to citizens in most democratic countries with a constitution.

It allows DoJ to take a person’s home, properties, business, car, cash or other assets on the mere suspicion that it is connected to criminal activity, and without ever arresting, charging or even convicting that person with a crime. Such a law is repugnant in most civilised societies and it is shocking that such a law exists in the US, a country that is supposed to recognise and hold dear rights to private property and due process of law.

US federal laws also allow forfeiture revenue to go into a newly created fund called Assets Forfeiture Fund, controlled by federal law enforcement.

As a result, federal forfeiture revenue can go back to the very agencies charged with enforcing the law, giving them a financial stake in forfeiture efforts.

State and local agencies can also participate in forfeiture with the feds and receive a cut of the revenue through the benign-sounding equitable-sharing programme.

Under this self-funding mechanism, the US government’s use of forfeiture has grown exponentially.

This practice of giving law enforcement agencies a financial stake in forfeitures by awarding them some, if not all, of the proceeds is legally and morally wrong.

Such financial incentive creates a conflict of interest resulting in the violation of basic due-process requirement of impartiality, which is the rule against bias.

Impartiality in the administration of justice is a bedrock principle of any good legal system.

No one should lose property without being convicted of a crime and law enforcement agencies should not profit from taking people’s property without ever proving a crime has been committed.

This is a fundamental principle and therein lies the injustice perpetrated by DoJ against 1MDB and its related parties.

JASON LEONG,
Kuala Lumpur

Clarence Thomas vs. Jeff Sessions on Civil Asset Forfeiture

Asset forfeiture has "led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses," Thomas writes.

Damon Root|Jul. 20, 2017 10:45 am

Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced this week that the Justice Department will increase the use of civil asset forfeiture, the practice that allows law enforcement officials to seize property from persons who have been neither charged with nor convicted of any crime.

"Civil asset forfeiture is a key tool," Sessions declared.

"President Trump has directed this Department of Justice to reduce crime in this country, and we will use every lawful tool that we have to do that."

But civil asset forfeiture is not a "lawful tool." It is an unconstitutional abuse of government power.

The Fifth Amendment forbids the government from depriving any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law.

Civil asset forfeiture turns that venerable principle on its head, allowing government agents to take what they want without the bother of bringing charges, presenting clear and convincing evidence, and obtaining a conviction in a court of law. It is the antithesis of due process.

By ordering the expansion of this unconstitutional practice, Sessions has placed himself on a collision course with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

As Thomas recently explained in a statement respecting the denial of certiorari in the case of Leonard v. Texas, not only has civil asset forfeiture "led to egregious and well-chronicled abuses" by law enforcement agencies around the country, but the practice is fundamentally incompatible with the Constitution.

Thomas did not mince words. The legal justifications offered in defense of civil asset forfeiture, he pointed out, cannot be squared with the text of the Constitution, which "presumably would require the [Supreme Court] to align its distinct doctrine governing civil forfeiture with its doctrines governing other forms of punitive state action and property deprivation."

Those other doctrines, Thomas noted, impose significant checks on the government, such as heightened standards of proof, numerous procedural safeguards, and the right to a trial by jury.

By contrast, civil asset forfeiture proceedings provide no such constitutional protections. Thomas left little doubt that when the proper case came before him, he would rule civil asset forfeiture unconstitutional.

Attorney General Sessions should take Justice Thomas' words to heart.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/07/20/clarence-thomas-vs-jeff-sessions-on-civi

PROPOGANDA SALAH & CURANG OLEH KERAJAAN NAJIB RAZAK BERKAITAN ISU PERUNDANGAN TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ  !!

HAKIKAT ASAS TINDAKAN DoJ DARI SUDUT UNDANG-UNDANG UNTUK PENGETAHUAN UMUM !!

Wahai Rakyat Malaysia yang prihatin, 

AsSalaamualaikum dan Salaam Sejahtera :

1. Sejak dari tarikh pemfailan TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ itu pada 15.06.2017 hingga kini, pelbagai pihak dari kalangan Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK, telah secara berterusan membuat pelbagai TUDUHAN dan TOHMAHAN yang berbentuk PROPOGANDA SALAH dan CURANG, dalam percubaan untuk MENYELEWENG FAKTA dan MENGELIRUKAN rakyat Malaysia yang prihatin berkaitan HAKIKAT asas TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ itu dari segi undang-undang, tanpa Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK mengambil langkah-langkah wajar yang SEDIA ADA di sisi undang-undang tempatan dan antarabangsa dalam menyokong TUDUHAN dan TOHMAHAN itu !! 

2. Kebanyakan dari kenyataan awal berbaur TUDUHAN dan TOHMAHAN membabi buta itu, adalah seperti yang disenaraikan dan dikomen saya, dalam Siri : 908 (bertarikh 18.06.2017) di 'facebook' saya sebelum ini, dan di beberapa Siri lanjutan selepas itu seperti yang disenaraikan di bawah !!

3. Saya tidak berhasrat kali ini untuk membalas satu-persatu akan kenyataan-kenyataan PROPOGANDA SALAH dan CURANG lanjutan oleh Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK itu, melalui tulisan di sini. Walau bagaimanapun, setelah membaca kandungan kenyataan JASA seperti yang dilaporkan oleh MALAYSIAKINI pada hari ini, 28.06.2017, saya percaya ada pentingnya untuk saya butirkan sedikit sebanyak HAKIKAT asas, untuk memudahkan Rakyat yang prihatin, memahami bentuk TINDAKAN DoJ itu dari sudut undang-undang, supaya ianya akan membantu menilai bahawa PROPOGANDA yang sering dikeluarkan oleh Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK, adalah SALAH dan CURANG !!

4. MALAYSIAKINI, pada hari ini melalui Laporan bertajuk "Tidak ada bukti isteri MO1 terima barangan kemas, kata JASA", telah memetik seorang anggota badan propaganda kerajaan, Jabatan Hal Ehwal Khas (JASA), iaitu TUN FAISAL ISMAIL AZIZ SEBAGAI BERKATA :

" Tiada bukti ia dibeli menggunakan wang 1MDB yang didakwa dicuri, tiada bukti ia (barangan kemas seperti yang didakwa oleh DoJ) diserahkan kepada isteri MO1 dan tiada bukti kesemua set barangan kemas ini disimpan oleh isteri MO1, ... "

5. HAKIKAT sebenar asas TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ yang PERTAMA dari sudut undang-undang, adalah seperti berikut :

(a) TINDAKAN SITAAN Doj itu adalah berbentuk QUASI JENAYAH (bukannya tindakan sivil sepenuhnya, mahupun bukan tindakan jenayah sepenuhnya) !! 

(b) Tindakan sitaan QUASI JENAYAH adalah satu langkah yang diwujudkan dan dibenarkan diambil oleh kebanyakan negara yang bertamaddun, untuk menentukan bahawa harta yang diperolehi dari sumber HARAM JENAYAH, tidak terus kekal di tangan penjenayah mahupun pihak-pihak ketiga yang memperolehinya.

(c) Di Malaysia sekalipun, kita mempunyai peruntukan tindakan sitaan  QUASI JENAYAH di bawah beberapa Akta yang telah diluluskan oleh Parlimen Malaysia dari masa ke semasa. Sebagai contoh, antara lain adalah peruntukan sitaan berkaitan harta hasil sumber JENAYAH pengedaran dadah (DDA), perlanggaran undang-undang perbankan (BAFIA) dan aktiviti gubahan wang haram (AMLATFA/AMLA). Kesemua peruntukan ini , membenarkan pihak berkuasa Malaysia untuk menahan harta-harta tersebut terlebih dahulu, dan selepas itu apabila siasatan diselesaikan kemudiannya, dan sekiranya ada pertuduhan diambil terhadap mana-mana pihak, yang seterusnya berjaya perolehi satu SABITAN JENAYAH di Mahkamah kelak, maka melalui proses lanjutan undang-undang yang berkaitan, harta-harta yang ditahan itu kemudiannya diSITA bagi kepentingan Malaysia dan pihak-pihak yang menjadi mangsa JENAYAH berkaitan.

(d) Justeru, HAKIKAT sebenar asas UNDANG-UNDANG yang PERTAMA adalah : TIDAK SEMESTInya siasatan perlu diselesaikan sebelum harta-harta yang dipercayai diperolehi dari sumber HARAM JENAYAH itu DITAHAN atau DISITA menurut peruntukan undang-undang negara bertamaddun terbabit !!

6.  HAKIKAT sebenar asas TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ yang KEDUA dari sudut undang-undang, adalah seperti berikut :

(a) Dalam mana-mana bentuk tindakan, samada sivil mahupun QUASI JENAYAH sekalipun (termasuk TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ ini), yang dibawa ke Mahkamah, memerlukan pihak yang membuat tuntutan untuk memfailkan KERTAS KAUSA (dokumen Mahkamah), yang akan membutirkan asas tuntutan serta fakta berkaitan yang AKAN DIBUKTIKAN KELAK, serta bentuk Perintah yang dipohon, dan pihak yang disaman itu.

(b) Walhal, dalam kes Jenayah substantif sekalipun, apabila seseorang itu dituduh di Mahkamah sekalipun, Kertas Pertuduhan (yang pada kebiasaannya tidak melebihi dua (2) mukasurat untuk setiap Pertuduhan), cuma akan mengandungi nama tertuduh, fakta asas yang didakwa sebagai jenayah yang dilakukan, berserta peruntukan Akta yang menjadikan perbuatan itu sebagai Jenayah ( contoh : Seksyen 302 Kanun Kesekaan ataupun Seksyen 39B Akta Dadah Berbahaya).

(c) Apabila pihak yang disaman dalam kes sivi mahupun kes QUASI JENAYAH memilih untuk tidak bersetuju dengan tuntutan itu, dan setelah pihak yang disaman diberi peluang failkan KERTAS KAUSA (dokumen Mahkamah) oleh yang disaman, Mahkamah akan menetapkan tarikh BICARA, samada melalui panggilan saksi ataupun melalui Afidavit (Surat Sumpah)(dan tertakluk kepada tatacara pebicaraan Mahkamah di negara terbabit), maka cuma di tahap BICARA inilah baru kesemua pihak diWAJIBkan untuk TAMPILkan BUKTI !! 

(d) Justeru, HAKIKAT sebenar asas UNDANG-UNDANG yang KEDUA adalah : BUKTI mana-mana tuntutan, di mana-mana Mahkamah, di mana-mana negara bertamaddun, TIDAK LANGSUNG diFAILkan bersama KERTAS KAUSA (dokumen Mahkamah) pada masa tuntutan mula-mula difailkan, sama-sekali, dan tidak akan didedahkan di dalam keempat-empat penjuru dokum tuntutan asal itu, melainkan rentetan fakta yang membutirkan dengan terperinci akan tuntutan itu sahaja !!

7. HAKIKAT sebenar asas TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ yang KETIGA dari sudut undang-undang, adalah seperti berikut :

(a) Secara khusus berkaitan TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ bertarikh 15.06.2017 ini, sekiranya NAJIB RAZAK (yang dirujuk sebagai MO1) dan ROSMAH MANSOR (yang dirujuk sebagai isteri MO1), masing-masing MASIH BERTEGAS bahawa kenyataan-kenyataan khusus yang merujuk kepada "pemberian hadiah barang-barang kemas kepada ROSMAH MANSOR oleh JHO LOW adalah dari sumber HARAM JENAYAH yang dilakukan terhadap 1MDB", seperti yang juga kononnya digesa oleh JASA melalui TUN FAISAL ISMAIL AZIZ, seperti yang dipetik di Perenggan 4 di atas, maka terdapat peruntukan jelas di sisi undang-undang di mana-mana Mahkamah, di mana-mana negara yang bertammaddun sekalipun, supaya pihak berkenaan, iaitu NAJIB RAZAK dan ROSMAH MANSOR dapat membuat permohonan di Mahkamah berkenaan bagi tujuan menjadi PENCELAH dalam TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ itu, dan selepas itu, untuk membuat permohonan bagi tujuan membatalkan Perenggan-perenggan yang secara khusus membuat kenyataan yang digesa KONONnya PALSU dan TIDAK TEPAT itu.

(b) Sebagai Rakyat Malaysia yang prihatin dan patriotik, semestinya, dan sekiranya apa yang digesa oleh JASA melalui TUN FAISAL ISMAIL AZIZ, seperti yang dipetik di Perenggan 4 di atas itu KONONnya adalah benar, maka Rakyat Malaysia berhak meMESTIkan  Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK mengembalikan maruah Malaysia daripada terus dijadikan bahan ketawa oleh negara luar, dengan mengambil segala langkah yang dibenarkan di sisi undang-undang di Mahkamah terbabit, supaya   Rakyat Malaysia boleh percayai kenyataan-kenyataan Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK ini, yang setakat pada sekarang, masih lagi berbentuk OMONG-OMONG KOSONG sahaja!!

(c) Justeru, HAKIKAT sebenar asas UNDANG-UNDANG yang KETIGA adalah : Pihak yang terjejas akibat daripada mana-mana kenyataan dalam KERTAS KAUSA (dokumen Mahkamah) DoJ itu, WAJIB mengambil langkah yang wujud untuk bersihkan namanya melalui peruntukan undang-undang yang sedia ada, terlebih dahulu, sebelum menggesa bahawa tuntutan itu KONONNYA tidak mempunyai asas !!

9. Kepada pihak PROPOGANDA Kerajaan NAJIB RAZAK, saya sarankan lagi agar nasihatilah NAJIB RAZAK dan ROSMAH MANSOR untuk mengambil langkah-langkah yang WAJIB dan PERLU di sisi UNDANG-UNDANG, sebelum anda keluarkan lagi mana-mana kenyataan lanjut yang SALAH dan CURANG, untuk MENYELEWENG FAKTA dan MENGELIRUKAN rakyat Malaysia yang prihatin berkaitan hakikat sebenar TINDAKAN SITAAN DoJ itu !!

BERANI KERANA BENAR !!!

DEMI AGAMA DAN NEGARA TERCINTA !!!

Haniff Khatri

28.06.2017 @ 2350

Labour MP tables motion on 1MDB in UK Parliamenthttps://www.malaysiakini.com/news/389230

BARONESS CHALKER of Wallasey, the Minister for Overseas Development, complained to Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary and her boss, about the granting of pounds 234m in state aid to the Pergau dam project in Malaysia.

Whitehall sources said yesterday that Lady Chalker was fiercely opposed to Pergau and gave full backing to her officials, notably Tim Lankester, at the time Permanent Secretary at the Overseas Development Administration, who objected in writing to Mr Hurd.

Baroness Chalker's role in the aid-for-arms controversy emerged as an MP said UK companies paid pounds 35m in 'bribes and backhanders' to middlemen and members of the Malaysian royal family. Using parliamentary privilege, Brian Sedgemore, Labour MP for Hackney South and Shoreditch, told a Commons select committee the allegations surfaced in October 1990.

Ann Clwyd, then shadow Minister for Overseas Development, wrote to the National Audit Office about the aid programme's 'misuse of large sums of taxpayers' money'.

Mr Sedgemore said the accusation centred on corruption by three companies: GEC, Trafalgar House and Balfour Beatty. Ms Clwyd had been told the cost of the pounds 400m project 'includes pounds 35m in bribes or 'fees''. He made his claim to the sub-committee of the Treasury and Civil Service committee which was hearing evidence from Sir John Bourn, NAO head. Sir John said it was his office's job to audit the accounts of public bodies such as the ODA. There was no evidence of corruption in the ODA's books.

However, he emphasised that he did not look at where the administration's money had gone - the NAO did not have the power to follow public money once it had been paid to private contractors.

Before international investors, Najib denounces Dr M’s legacy

By Syed Jaymal Zahiid

Tuesday July 25, 2017
10:42 AM GMT+8

UPDATED: July 25, 2017
12:07 PM GMT+8

KUALA LUMPUR, July 25 ― Speaking before the international business community here today, Datuk Seri Najib Razak denounced the legacy of his predecessor Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as being rife with cronyism and corruption.

Najib rarely uses international business platforms to criticise his political foes but today the Umno president said it was necessary to appeal to investors to avoid placing faith in an Opposition bloc led by a man with a track record for “cutting corners” and rolling out policies that only benefited his close allies.

"This government..will always be straight with the people and we will always do the right by the people," Najib said in his keynote address at Invest Malaysia 2017, a private event for investors.

"We will always put their interests first, from economic welfare to security even if it's not the most popular thing to do..this is also one of the reasons I am not very popular with that certain nonagenarian.

"Under his leadership many corners were cut, and the Malaysian people had to pay a very high price so that a few of his friends benefitted," the prime minister added.

Najib has increasingly targeted Dr Mahathir since the latter began a campaign to remove him, which included resigning from Umno, forming an Opposition party, and becoming chairman of the Pakatan Harapan pact.

Continuing with his salvo against the former PM, Najib said today his government was undoing much of the damage caused by Dr Mahathir's policies, such as by “cracking down on crony capitalism”.

Dr Mahathir had a preference for trickle-down economics that favoured select businessmen and companies, but which ended up concentrating wealth in a handful of elites.

"No more sweetheart deals. No more national follies kept going to stroke the ego of one man," the BN chairman said.

Najib also warned of a campaign to discourage the business community from supporting his government through what he described as deliberate “misinformation” by the Opposition.

The BN chairman accused the Opposition of starting a drive to sabotage the economy through smear tactics that are often reported by pro-opposition press.

"There has in fact been a concerted campaign to send such misinformation overseas to damage Malaysia's economy for their own selfish political objectives.

"So if you receive these smears, or you read it in publications that do not check facts properly, please beware".

The prime minister previously asserted that political rivals were aiming to undermine the economic success of his government in order to generate political support.

But Najib said they have been unsuccessful as Malaysia's economy continued to grow robustly and draw in investments.

He noted Malaysia's GDP has grown at an average of 4 per cent annually since he took office in 2009. This year alone trade increased to 24 per cent or RM430 billion compared to the same period last year.

Najib said the data proved investors remain confident in his government.

“All this can point to only one conclusion, namely, our economy continues to prosper and we are stronger than ever as a result of the reforms and programmes the government has put in place,” he said.

“The business community wants the certainty of knowing the government is committed to the necessary reforms and to fostering a culture of entrepreneurship, transparency, accountability, and good regulations.”

PM admits to lapses in 1MDB governance

Noel Achariam 
Published on 25 Jul 2017 11:36AM

PRIME Minister Najib Razak today admitted there were clear lapses in corporate governance in state investor 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), but said he would not pour more money, unlike a predecessor.

In a clear reference to mentor-turned-nemesis Dr Mahathir Mohamad, he said he had ordered "unprecedented" investigations into the 1MDB scandal.

"However, rather than bury our heads in the sand, we ordered investigations into the company at a scale unprecedented in our nation's history, rather than funnel money after to cover up any issues 1MDB might have faced, the model embraced by a former leader.

"I instructed the rationalisation of the company," Najib said in his speech at the Invest Malaysia Conference in Kuala Lumpur today.

He said the rationalisation was progressing well as many of the assets formerly owned by 1MDB were thriving.

Citing the Tun Razak Exchange as an example, Najib said one only needs to drive by to see the progress of the new construction site.

While there are numerous investigations under way around the world, including three civil suits filed by the US Department of Justice (DoJ), Singapore is the only country to have prosecuted those involved in 1MDB, chaired by Najib.

The DoJ moved to seize another US$540 million (RM2.3 billion) in assets allegedly bought with money stolen from 1MDB, bringing the misappropriated figure from 1MDB to US$4.5 billion.

However, Najib has consistently denied any wrongdoing and the Malaysian authorities have cleared him.

Najib said while there were issues at 1MDB, it was certain politicians who blew them out of proportion while trying to sabotage the company in a bid to topple the government.

"If 1MDB hadn’t been around they would have chosen another line of attack to illegitimately try to change the government."– July 25, 2017.

Tycoon Abu Sahid wants to buy PLUS

FMT Reporters | Aug 1, 17 12:14pm 

KUALA LUMPUR: Corporate tycoon Abu Sahid Mohamad wants to take over highway operator PLUS Malaysia Bhd. The group executive chairman of Maju Holdings Sdn Bhd wants to buy up both the 51% share held by UEM Group Bhd and the 49% held by the EPF.

The acquisition could cost RM30 billion or more. He intends to do this via his flagship Maju Holdings Sdn Bhd, according to a report in The Edge. UEM is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Khazanah Nasional Bhd.

The Edge reported that Abu Sahid was trying to meet Khazanah managing director Azman Mokhtar over the possible acquisition.

Abu Sahid, who was once chairman of Perwaja, told The Edge: “Yes, I want to buy all of PLUS [Malaysia] … the EPF’s 49% as well.”

However, he declined to reveal details, as he has yet to commence talks. If his plan works out, it could lead to the largest corporate exercise in Malaysia to date, according to The Edge.

Abu Sahid was quoted by The Edge as saying: “I’m very, very confident of pulling it off. I have everything ready – I have the money, I have the blessing from the highest levels in the country, I have the advisers and bankers all ready, and I have the formula to do it.”

UEM declined to comment to an email query by The Edge, saying only that it had a policy not to comment on reports that were speculative in nature.

The UEM Group and the EPF took over the assets and liabilities of PLUS Expressways in 2011 in a RM23 billion deal. PLUS Malaysia has five concessions:

• Projek Lebuhraya Utara-Selatan Bhd, with an 846km concession that includes the North-South Expressway, New Klang Valley Expressway, Federal Highway Route 2 and Seremban-Port Dickson Highway;
• Expressway Lingkaran Tengah Sdn Bhd, with a 63km concession that includes the North-South Expressway Central Link;
• Linkedua (M) Bhd, with the 47km Malaysia-Singapore Second Crossing;
• Konsortium Lebuhraya Butterworth-Kulim Sdn Bhd, with the 17km Butterworth-Kulim Expressway; and 
• Penang Bridge Sdn Bhd with the 13.5km Penang Bridge.

All of PLUS’s concessions end in December 2038.

Abu Sahid also confirmed there were negotiations to sell Maju Expressway but nothing had been finalised as he would not sell for anything less than RM3 billion.

He was asked to comment on market talk of the UEM Group considering to buy Maju Expressway Sdn Bhd, which operates the Maju Expressway (MEX) that links Kuala Lumpur city centre with the Kuala Lumpur International Airport in Sepang. A 16.8km extension to KLIA will further increase the value of MEX. The extension, known as MEX 2, is slated to cost RM1.7 billion to construct – with the engineering, procurement and construction sum of RM1.29 billion fixed under the contract.

Maju Expressway registered an after-tax profit of RM7.62 million on the back of RM105.57 million in revenue for its financial year ended Dec 31, 2015. It has a 33-year concession, which started in December 2004.

"... nothing more than a two-bit mafia racket administered to by cold-blooded sicilian-argentinians who receive direction from the despicable owner, a Malaysian prince named Tan Sri Arumugam."

Before the last general election, Mahathir had a meeting with the IPP owners in Buenos Aires and they were complaining of 1MDB nationalising IPP.

When 1MDB invited Mahathir to launch a CSR for the fishermen of Langkawi for GE13, he turned it down and grumbled as to why nationalise after the trouble to privatise.

So it has to be more than mere issue with policy.

During the last GE, too few and too little of Mahathir's corporate cronies donated to the BN political war chest.

Low also issued a statement in June, saying the U.S. government was continuing “inappropriate efforts to seize assets despite not having proven that any improprieties have occurred.”

"The U.S. is moving forward with a criminal investigation into money stolen from a Malaysian state investment fund that allegedly was used to acquire about $1.7 billion in real estate, art, jewelry and other assets.

Court filings by the Justice Department Thursday show the U.S. is escalating its probe in a worldwide effort to track how much of the money that was raised by 1Malaysia Development Bhd. was used to pay for luxury real estate in New York, London and Beverly Hills, film productions, private jets, yachts and more.

Justice Department officials asked a judge in Los Angeles to put on hold civil forfeiture lawsuits against assets acquired by Malaysian financier Low Taek Jho, also known as Jho Low, and others involved with 1MDB because pursuing these cases may hamper the criminal investigation."

No representatives need go anywhere as Malaysia does not and rightfully so, recognize the incomplete fictitious jurisdiction of the DoJ in the 1MDB affair.

What the 1MDB affair has exposed is an illegality the US complains of often against countries like China and any other state that has disagreements with it. The appropriation of an independent nations sovereignty.

Who gave the US the right to pursue the 1MDB complaint. The complaint has to come from a lawful authority firstly that is recognized as having authority to make such complaints.

... US DOJ civil action ... runs contrary to many principles of natural justice. It implicates people unfairly and does not provide a platform for those implicated to defend. It's an action against assets but without trial on the person.

... why they had promised to give back to some foreigners (Malaysian) from a far away land (Malaysia) certain assets subjected to a civil forfeiture proceedings in US when most if not all of the assets supposedly purchased by monies stolen from the foreigners will actually go to US law enforcement agencies in accordance with US laws if they are successful in securing the forfeiture.

.. the idea of the US trying to save Malaysians of their assets is akin to the argument that the US was trying to save the world from weapon of mass destruction by bombing Saddam Hussein and the people of Iraq. .. there is no such thing as a free lunch.

An FBI agent warned in a U.S. court filing that information disclosed in the civil cases may reveal “potential targets and subjects of the investigation and the investigative techniques that have been and will be used in the investigation.”

"Such disclosures could result in the destruction of evidence, flight of potential subjects and targets, or the identification and intimidation of potential witnesses," according to the agent’s declaration.

Baru nak buat "Federal criminal investigation"? Boom ... Pang ... Boom ... Pang ... Boom ...Pang! Dah dua pengumuman DoJ! Dua tahun berturut. Beratus muka surat, macam-macam cerita...... Macam nak rak! Laa .... Masih peringkat " Siasatan jenayah" ke???

Kalau dulu masa pengumuman DoJ kali pertama tu main, bunting, anak dah umur 4 bulan dah pun! Tak kan baru ni nak mengorat,'dating-dating, kenal-kenal'..... Wayang Hollywood grade B pun tak sloppy cegini plotnya!

"We look forward to the court being presented with the actual facts which demonstrate that the DOJ’s case is completely without foundation."

Mkini March 2017's trail cover, Guan Eng: Why not probe Jho Low's father, also a Tan Sri?

SEAWAL BULAN DISEMBER 2014 SAYA SUDAH BERITAHU PERDANA MENTERI BAHAWA JHO LOW SEDANG MENIPU BELIAU!! BANYAK PERKARA DATO SERI NAJIB TUN RAZAK DAN ISTERI TIDAK TAHU MENGENAINYA!!

Saya tetap berazam untuk teruskan perjuangan bagi menegakkan kebenaran dalam kes skandal 1mdb sehingga penyangak jho low ditangkap, didakwa seterusnya dihukum di atas segala kesalahannya mengkhianati bangsa serta negara!!

Penyangak jho low adalah pengkhianat nombor satu negara!!

Pihak penguatkuasa undang-undang di malaysia banyak memberi muka dan tidak mahu membawa pulang untuk proses siasatan serta tindakan undang-undang keatasnya.

Saya sudah buat pelbagai laporan pdrm, sprm serta pihak penguatkuasa undang-undang di luar negara keatas penyangak jho low yang telah menyelewengkan puluhan bilion ringgit dana kerajaan dan wang rakyat.

Penyangak jho low harus dikenakan tindakan undang-undang serta disabitkan dengan kesalahan di bawah 'treason' kerana telah mencuri wang negara dengan jumlah yang terlalu besar sehinggakan meninggalkan implikasi negatif terhadap sistem ekonomi malaysia pada hari ini.

Sebenarnya penyangak yang cuba sabotaj ekonomi negara dan sepatutnya ditahan di bawah akta sosma adalah penyangak jho low bukan saya!!

Tetapi ketua polis negara tangkap saya dan tahan selama dua bulan di dalam lokap ibu pejabat polis dang wangi serta penjara sg buloh kerana menuduh secara rambang kononnya saya cuba sabotaj ekonomi dan sistem perbankan negara!!

Sehingga kini siasatan kes skandal 1mdb baru habis oleh pdrm tetapi pada waktu itu macamana khalid abu bakar dapat bukti saya cuba sabotaj ekonomi negara?! Ini amat pelik!!

Siasatan belum selesai pada waktu itu saya sudahpun ditangkap dan ditahan oleh pihak pdrm!!

Secara sejujurnya pada bulan disember 2014; saya selaku naib ketua umno bahagian batu kawan pergi berjumpa dengan presiden umno di kediaman beliau untuk mengingatkan dato seri najib tun razak bahawa penyangak jho low sedang menipu perdana menteri mahupun kerajaan malaysia!!

Dalam perbualan saya secara ramah mesra dengan dato seri najib tun razak di kediamannya selama hampir sejam; saya dapat melihat bahawa perdana menteri agak 'lost' dalam banyak fakta kes skandal 1mdb. Banyak perkara yang beliau tidak tahu menahu pada waktu itu!!

Sebab itu saya kata pada dato seri najib tun razak sewaktu perjumpaan tersebut agar mengizinkan saya meneruskan perjuangan untuk menegakkan kebenaran dalam kes skandal 1mdb.

Malahan saya pada waktu itu mahu memikul tanggungjawab secara teramanah yang mungkin selaku pemimpin akar umbi umno untuk lawan rasuah seterusnya membela presiden parti.

Dengan penuh keikhlasan saya bagi tahu dato seri najib tun razak bahawa banyak benda yang beliau dan isteri tidak tahu mengenai pengkhianatan penyangak jho low.

Atas dasar inilah saya katakan pada dato seri najib tun razak agar duduk ditepi serta biarkan saya terus lawan pengkhianatan penyangak jho low secara habis-habisan!!

Tambahan pula pada waktu itu saya adalah naib ketua umno  bahagian batu kawan di pulau pinang.

Niat saya amat ikhlas dan ingin mempertahankan presiden umno kerana tidak mahu parti umno diheret bersama ke dalam kes skandal 1mdb yang cukup hangat pada waktu itu!!

Akhirnya, dengan kuasa Allah swt terbukti benar apa yang saya perkatakan secara peribadi pada dato seri najib tun razak pada bulan disember 2014 mempunyai asas yang kuat serta benar.

Kalau kita baca laporan DoJ jilid 2; saya amat.yakin pada realitinya perdana menteri malaysia serta isteri banyak tidak tahu akan agenda jahat penyangak jho low di dalam menyelewengkan puluhan bilion wang kerajaan dan rakyat malaysia.

Ianya masih tidak terlambat untuk bertindak keatas penyangak jho low!!

Tarik balik sekatan perjalanan saya ke luar negara agar sekali lagi saya akan membuktikan secara sahih mengenai pengkhianatan penyangak jho low terhadap berbagai unsur-unsur jenayah yang dilakukannya.

Seandainya pihak kerajaan membenarkan saya ke luar negara; segala inisiatif untuk memerangi segala pengkhianatan penyangak jho low sudah pun disusun-atur!! Saya tahu apa nak buat dan bagaimana nak bertindak mengikut saluran undang-undang di luar negara keatas penyangak jho low!!

Pihak saya kini sedang memberi keutamaan untuk terus berjuang sehingga penyangak jho low ditangkap, dibicarakan dan akhirnya kita menghumbankan beliau ke dalam penjara di atas segala kejahatannya mengkhianat negara malaysia tercinta ini!!

Situasi kemelut mutakhir politik dan ekonomi malaysia adalah disebabkan oleh pengkhianatan penyangak jho low semata-mata!!

Dalam apa situasi dan rintangan; lawan tetap lawan sehingga kita penjarakan penyangak jho low!!

Ikhlas dari;
KHAIRUDDIN ABU HASSAN
Koordinator
Deklarasi Rakyat
15 Ogos 2017

The real losses were more than US$13 billion or RM130 billion at today’s value. The monthly turnover was RM700 billion, while the total forward position was US$150 billion.

All as a result of someone mesmerised to a new toy of program trading introduced to him and yearned to get even with the market for a major loss earlier for trying to corner a commodity market.

Program trading is for trading in smaller amount and riding on trends. The way BNM was trading it was as if they were trying to be the Hunt Brothers that dominated the silver market at one time

The country might have been defenceless to attacks on the ringgit by hedge funds in 1997.  Dr Mahathir conveniently made Soros a scapegoat to lay blame.

The currency crisis led to a massive economic crisis and contributed to hardship to the rakyat and country for many years.

Big businesses failed and the banking industry had to be restructured to avert collapse.

There were corporate Bumiputera entrepreneurs developed by Dr Mahathir and Tun Daim Zainuddin to spearhead the development of a Bumiputera industrial and commercial community that crashed along.

That led to loss of jobs and wiped a significant portion of Bumiputera corporate wealth. Most of these corporate personalities could not return and bounce back.

However, there is more to the story as there was systematic dismantling of their empire and their assets sold to other Malaysian businessmen that possibly could be proxies.

For the common folk, it affected the downfall of financial sponsorship and droves of students abroad had to be recalled home.

There was widespread unemployment. Small businesses went belly up. Many became bankrupt.

There was a significant loss in the country’s wealth..