UMNO leaders and the PAS President Abdul Hadi Awang may not want answers to these questions,
No exemptions please:Double standards Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali
why Najib never admitted that he returned the money to the Saudi royal family. Lim also said that there had been speculation that Tan Sri Gani Patail could have been sacked because the A-G’s Chambers under him was preparing to charge the prime minister for corruption.
Attorney-General Mohd Apandi Ali’s explanation exonerating Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak is inadequate and makes no sense, National Human Rights Society (Hakam) president Ambiga Sreenevasan said.
She urged Apandi and the MACC to disclose more details of their findings so that the public could understand how they came to decide on not to press charges against Najib.
Nobody is Above The Law, Not Even AG Apandi or Prime Minister Najib Razak The total monies deposited in Najib’s personal bank accounts was not RM2.6 billion but RM4 billion or even more.
No exemptions please:Double standards Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali there has to be a cost to hypocrisy.While corruption in rising Malaysia has moved with internet speed into the 21st century,. The good news, then, is that corruption is transparently halal. debate has illuminated the inherent tension between the political and the legal duties of the office of Attorney-General The newly minted AG Apandi’s decision is not surprising nor shocking to the public. It is well known fact that Apandi was specially appointed to clear Najib of any wrong doing.
If MACC had concluded nothing wrong …. AG would have announced it straight away isn’t it? Their explanation is always unsatisfactory …. they never explain the full scenario with all the loose ends tied up. If received RM2.6 bil and returned RM2.03 bil …. surely people will ask what happen to the difference isn’t it? And what about those in SRC who transferred the money to Najib? Why are they not arrested? Why did they transfer the money and who authorised them?.outrage asks a question that repeatedly withers on the dry sand of evasive clichés. How long will the apartheid of two laws for the same crime continue?Great decision – legal precedent now set that by returning 80% of monies received is returned, all is forgiven. Wonder what Bank Negara was doing when funds flowed in and also flowed out pre-approval was needed for large sums ?Received rm2.6 bil & return rm2.06 bil. What kind of transaction is this? Cleaning dirty money for commission So how could the decision of such a person not biased when it was already a calculated move put in motion by the suspect right from the beginning?
Once again we see corruption to the core.the AG would not be divulging any information out anytime soon. There will be various of citation that would make such disclosure not allowed.
Even if it is allowed, would you still believe the report or any evidence tendered? The Alice in Wonderland Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali , a speaker joke the 2.6 billion and question why a person who so capable in getting donation want be a PM. He should work as donation collector full time with with some legal help from newly minted AG Apandi’s
The centre of gravity in any Judiciary is best measured by the credibility of its Attorney-General. law is unconstitutional evince a lamentabl focused on policy outcomes rather than legal questions attorney general has a duty the validity oflaw must take to support the federal Constitution or the supremacy of federal law usually little more than self-serving sound seek political advantage by refusing bites The term was originally used to refer to any person who holds a general power of attorney to represent a principal in all matters. In the common law tradition, anyone who represents the state, especially in criminal prosecutions, is such an attorney. Although a government may designate some official as the permanent attorney general, anyone who comes to represent the state in the same way may, in the past, be referred to as such, even if only for a particular case. Today, however, in most jurisdictions the term is largely reserved as a title of the permanently appointed attorney general of the state, sovereign or other member of the royal family.
politically ambitious attorneys general has a power to defend the prime minister
A review of the A-G’s decision was necessary, Lim said, to determine whether there had been a conflict of interest and if Apandi’s decision not to prosecute the prime minister was correct based on the MACC’s investigation papers Apandi’s decision to clear Najib should now be reviewed and the best people to do this was a high level three-man committee comprising two former judges and the former A-G Tan Sri Abu Talib Othman.
“What happened to the balance of RM570 million from the original sum of RM2.6 billion?” Lim questioned in a statement.
why Najib never admitted that he returned the money to the Saudi royal family. Tan Sri Gani Patail could have been sacked because the A-G’s Chambers under him was preparing to charge the prime minister for corruption. The “extraordinary circumstances” of Apandi’s appointment as A-G by Najib in July last year were reasons why the new A-G should had avoided any conflict of interest and withdrawn from any decision-making on the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission’s (MACC) investigations