Why we Malaysians are such suckers for all sorts of conmen Is Malaysia going to pieces?
a trauma turns into a struggle between anger and amnesia. It is a no-contest. Amnesia wins every time.explains the callous indifference to the perpetrators of crime evasion was prelude to escape local wrath. Over time, even the noise has become a passing perfunctoryThe ebb from outrage to rage, its decline to umbrage, and then a drift to amnesia is the narrative of the 12 months Our unstated reason has been that action against Najib, new media.http://lawmattersjournalmalaysia.blogspot.my/ has done some moving reportage of in the last few days. It would be interesting to find out, possibly through market research, whether the readers of the nation’s most powerful newspaper have been moved at all.
the Swiss also tell us that there is misappropriation of money. All of these are linked with 1MDB and invariable to one man, the chief fundraiser, and with his private bank accounts. The PM has a credibility deficit as do you, Mr AG.there is a deficiency in our law.disputed that might argue that there is no law that says that the receipt of a donation from a foreign source is illegal. The motive of the “donation” is definitely important if the recipient is the PM.By receiving such a huge sum will certainly make the PM feel obliged to the donor, and what the donor wants in return can be detrimental to the interest of the country.No one gives such huge sum for nothing and this is the reason why the people want to know the motive of the “donation”.Apandi, your answer is naive. If a person has billions, certainly there is no problem for him to give away RM2.6 billion, but it is certainly a big problem if the recipient is a PM, regardless of its purpose
have to accept that Arabia is the source of various fables, from Ali Baba and quite deservedly the Forty Thieves to Sinbad the Sailor to The Arabian Nights.
But now,Malaysin will be impressed and no doubt titillated to learn that you, without the least shame, guilt, and self-respect, are the author of the latest tale of wonder.under that Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act “gratification” means “money, donation, gift, loan, fee, reward, valuable security, property or interest in property being property of any description whether movable or immovable, financial benefit, or any other similar advantage”.It is clear that donation comes under the meaning of gratification as defined by the Act. To dismiss it as easily as you did makes you look incompetent.
ALSO READ THIS Apandi, harsher laws will protect me from journalists
When Attorney-General Mohamed Apandi Ali determine the state of law the real cost of a bribe
a traffic cop in the fairy-tale town of Swat had booked a car speeding through its bazaar, NATO troops could have left Pakistan by 2003, Iraq might have escaped NATO’s invasion, Barack Obama would probably be an unknown Senator from Chicago and George Bush Junior’s presidential library in Texas would certainly have something to cheer about. But, according to Maryam, her husband Ibrahim al-Kuwaiti “quickly settled the matter”, and the bribed Swat cop never realized he had just let Osama bin Laden escape. Maryam was giving evidence before the Justice Javed Iqbal commission, set up to enquire into the events of 2 May 2011, when US Navy Seals flew three hours into Pak territory, found and killed Osama. Nothing works on our great subcontinent better than instant cash. Al-Kuwati, Osama’s most trust aide, knew that. This is the kind of authentic detail which makes a fabulous story so entirely believable.
Who’s the RM2.6b Saudi prince?
In the great toss-up between perception and evidence, the former generally wins. Conventional wisdom, for instance,Apandi says donations are not illegal under Malaysian law. Corruption is better understood with a scan below the surface. Tilt the perspective on what seems an obvious fact, and the picture changes to startling effect. has made a dream debut as Najib’s sidekick think back to the start of much play of an opinion poll, done by his associate in the open. His message was unambiguous — he is in the game for governance, not maverick thrills, and he was taken seriously by voters.
“Under Article 145 (3) of the Federal constitution, the A-G has power only to institute, conduct and discontinue any (criminal) proceedings, but has no authority to order any investigation agency to close its investigation papers.
“This is a case of public importance that has attracted worldwide attention. The AG must help the MACC to collect evidence as the source of the fund is outside Malaysia,” said Abu Talib.
request Swiss AG to close 1MDB case
between March and April 2013, RM2.6 billion was wired into PM Najib Razak’s personal account.
That is considered an income and not a political donation as political donations have to go through a registered political party and not under anyone’s personal account.
Secondly, between March/April 2013 and the time that the bulk of the money was supposedly returned in August 2013, Najib would have earned interest. That is an income that could be taxable.
Thirdly, as US$61 million (RM186 million) is still not returned, this again is an income that Najib could have to pay tax on.
Fourthly, is there no law in this country that prohibits foreigners transmitting absurd amounts of money into the personal account of the sitting PM of Malaysia? Isn’t this a subject of national security?
Fifthly, what on earth was Bank Negara and its governor Zeti Akhtar Aziz doing in this period?
And if money had entered into Najib’s personal account, that money is officially considered Najib’s and will no longer be the property of the late Saudi king’s son (unless he has any legal document to prove it was a loan and needs to be returned).
So Najib cannot be considered to be ‘returning’ the money to him. As a matter of fact, Najib can be questioned for making a payment to a foreigner (altogether another matter of national security concern).
Was the amount wired officially? Does Bank Negara have a legal account of it being wired? Was bank charges made by Najib to wire this money across?
For us, just to transmit a measly RM1,000 to Indonesia for our maids, we are instructed to fill up details of our address, occupation, MyKad number, contact number, etc, etc.
Can the banks/Bank Negara provide us these details of how Najib made the payment to this Saudi prince in August 2013?
Since attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali has claimed that it is one of Saudi king’s son who ‘donated’ the RM2.6 billion to Najib, Apandi is now duty-bound to tell the nation:
a) Name of the donor;Everyone knows that the seventh son of the late Saudi king, Prince Turki Abdullah, is the man Apandi could be referring to.
He is not that rich and wealthy. In fact, he was allegedly paid US$77 million by 1MDB. Clearly, he does not have that kind of money to donate RM2.6 billion to Najib
MACC and Bank Negara had both reportedly recommended charges, but it’s only you alone who claimed the PM and 1MDB had committed no wrongdoings
Apandi, why must you insist on new evidence from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and Bank Negara before you agree to reopen their cases?
on the strength of the existing evidence produced, there is already enough to charge a certain someone for alleged crimes.
READMORE Case closed does justice matter