Pakatan Harapan Rakyat Sabah

Sabtu, 23 Julai 2016

Wake Up Malaysians! - Comment

Wake Up Malaysians! - Comment

22 JUL 2016

Ready to riot for Najib

Najib has not hesitated to get his paid-up bullies in Red Shirts onto the streets to threaten ordinary folk, following the DOJ’s devastating details over his thefts from 1MDB.

But it’s next week that he plans to really take charge.

On 1st August his shocking National Security Act comes into force, designed to hand him dictatorial powers wherever he likes, against whom he likes for any six months at a time. Then he can renew those powers.

The bill was introduced without warning late on the final day of the Parliamentary session at the end of last year. Surprised MPs were given no time to scrutinise it, let alone put forward amendments and the debate was cursory as it was rushed through its stages in an effective pre-planned coup by the Prime Minister against his Parliament and the democratic rights of his own people.

Even the Sultans and the Agong have been shocked into a rare refusal to sign it unamended – but rather than accept their counsel on a matter of core national security he has brushed their concerns aside and forced it into law unchanged or re-considered.

That Najib’s excuse was the need to combat ISIS is no surprise.  Yet the terms of this Act would lead anyone to conclude that Malaysia has experienced worse threats than Europe, Indonesia and the US put together, which of course is not true.

None of those countries have attempted to create such sweeping powers to combat terrorists – the reason being that this law has nothing to do with fighting criminals… and everything to do with protecting the one who is presently in charge.

Is Najib Razak a safe pair of hands for such powers?

To give just a single example of the evil intent of this National Security Act, consider the clause that cancels the formal inquestinto the death of anyone killed by army or police in any crackdown under its provisions.

Someone must have thought closely to insert such a sinister detail in advance.  That someone must have decided that they are tired of being inconvenienced by all the paraphernalia of the law when it comes to murder cases. That person wants to be freed from questioning and investigation, when someone who gets in his way is ordered dead.

Does Malaysia want to place such a dangerous law in the hands of a desperate thief and liar like Najib, who is furthermore himself personally associated with a string of murky, half-solved murders?

And yet, the mainstream press in Malaysia has been almost as silent on this deadly law, as over the shocking revelations by America’s Department of Justice about their Prime Minister’s thefts from 1MDB.  The story which has been headlines for the past two days in every other country in the world has remained virtually unreported where it is most relevant – Malaysia.

Core messages the Malaysian media are avoiding!

What press coverage there has been has even attempted to pretend that the description of Najib as ‘Malaysian Official 1′ means that he has somehow not been identified in the US indictment.  Do they think Malaysian’s are laughably stupid?

For the avoidance of doubt the PM is plainly and clearly identified in the United States Department of Justice indictment as the corrupt official who received $681 million in his private bank account direct from 1MDB (no Saudi Royals in sight).

The rest of the world media has had zero problem in making the connection, as evinced by the headline at the top of this article.  It is merely that legal documents only cite by name those who are directly moved against in that indictment – since Najib placed the US-based loot in the name of his step-son Riza and Jho Low (both now hiding in Malaysia and Taiwan) he was not directly relevant to that indictment.

However, his proven duplicity and shocking level of corruption is supremely relevant to people in Malaysia.

Malaysian media have tried to pretend otherwise


There is an over-used analogy, which explains a dangerous torpor, which could finally lose Malaysians their last vestiges of freedom, promising poverty and misery for their country.

A frog will jump out if you put it into hot water, but if you start from cold and heat it up, it stays and cooks.

After years of incremental abuses and ever-worsening corrupted practice, it seems Malaysians no longer understand a tipping-point or see the moment to act.

Revelations that mobilised Icelanders and even people in Brazil to successfully voice their outrage and to pressure the departure of discredited leaders, seem in danger of falling on deaf ears amongst self-defeatist Malaysians, who have perhaps bubbled in the pot too long?

It seems too many prefer to explain why ‘nothing can be done’, rather than take a risk and do it. This paralysis is worst amongst those with the most responsibility to take action now – those around Najib. Their failure to do the necessary is forcing others – ordinary people – to have to do their job of replacing a leader who has lost the plot.

Here we have one of the remaining countries in the world where sodomy remains a crime and was even used to place a popular opposition leader in jail on cooked-up charges. Yet, the population is being asked to nonetheless bend over and be thus abused.

How will once proud Malaysians be able to look other nations in the face if they let it happen and surrender up their freedoms to a thief, who has been exposed and discredited the world over for buying power with money stolen from the poor?

Khamis, 21 Julai 2016



Posted: 20 Jul 2016 09:27 AM PDT

Khadem, Jho Low dan Riza Aziz

"Pendakwa AS berkata dana disalahgunakan daripada 1MDB dipindah kepada mereka yang menubuhkan Petrosaudi, iaitu syarikat yang menjalankan usaha sama dengan 1MDB. Kemudian dana dipindahkan semula kepada pegawai tinggi kerajaan Malaysia yang dikenali sebagai "Malaysian Official One"."


Jabatan Keadilan Amerika Syarikat pagi ini (Rabu, waktu tempatan di Los Angeles) memfailkan tindakan undang-undang, bertujuan merampas berpuluh-puluh hartanah yang berkait dengan 1Malaysia Development Berhad ( 1MDB).

Menurut dokumen difailkan itu ia bernilai lebih AS$3.5 bilion (RM14,00 Juta) dikatakan disalahguna daripada institusi berkenaan.

Reuters melaporkan tindakan undang-undang tersebut yang difailkan di Los Angeles itu pagi ini (kira-kira jam 9 pagi waktu tempatan) bertujuan membuat rampasan aset yang 'terlibat dalam dan boleh dikesan berhubung konspirasi antarabangsa untuk menggubal wang haram disalah gunakan dari 1MDB'.

Menurut dokumen pendakwaan berkenaan, kesalahan itu dilakukan dalam tempoh empat tahun dan melibatkan beberapa individu termasuk para pegawai Malaysia dan rakan sekutunya.

Mereka berkomplot untuk menipu bagi memindahkan berbilion daripada 1MDB.

Bagaimanapun, daripada tindakan undang-undang tersebut, tiada satu pun  menamakan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

Namun, tindakan tersebut menamakan mereka yang rapat dengan Najib, termasuk anak tiri Perdana Menteri iaitu Riza Aziz sebagai 'individu berkaitan' dalam kes itu.

Mereka juga menamakan pembiaya Malaysia, Low Taek Jho atau Jho Low serta pegawai kerajaan Abu Dhabi, Khadem al- Qubaisi dan Mohamed Ahmed Badawy Al- Husseiny.

Sebelum ini New York Times (NYT) menyebut, Khadem Al Qubaisi, ialah bekas eksekutif syarikat Emiriah Arab Bersatu (UAE), International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC).

Pendakwa Amerika Syarikat berkata dana disalahgunakan daripada 1MDB dipindah kepada mereka yang menubuhkan Petrosaudi, iaitu syarikat yang menjalankan usaha sama dengan 1MDB

Selepas itu dana kemudian dipindahkan semula kepada seseorang atau pegawai tinggi dalam kerajaan Malaysia yang hanya dikenali sebagai "Malaysian Official One".

Aset di kenal pasti membabitkan penthouse, kediaman mewah, hasil seni dan lukisan, malah juga jet peribadi.

Salah satu hartanah di Los Angeles yang menjadi sasaran Jabatan Keadilan AS.

“Penyelewengan itu itu dilakukan dalam beberapa fasa dalam tempoh beberapa tahun,” menurut pendakwa berkenaan.

Dana yang disalahguna itu membeli Aset Defenden, selain membiayai kehidupan mewah mereka yang turut dibabitkan, seperti membeli barang kemas dan lukisan mahal serta membeli hartanah mewah.

Juga digunakan untuk tujuan berjudi, membayar sewa ahli muzik dan selebriti bagi menghadiri parti dan majlis-majlis mewah anjuran mereka.

Kerajaan Amerika Syarikat sebelum ini dilapor merancang menyita aset bernilai lebih AS$1 bilion yang dibeli oleh pihak-pihak rapat dengan Najib dan dikatakan datang daripada 1MDB.

Aset-aset itu dilapor dalam bentuk harta tanah serta barangan mewah dan seni. Ia dikatakan kes terbesar dibawa oleh Jabatan Kehakiman AS.

Walaupun bahagian itu biasanya hanya menyita aset dan bukan mendakwa individu, laporan itu menyebut aduan berkaitan aset tidak menghalang pertuduhan jenayah yang mungkin.

NYT berkata pihaknya gagal mendapatkan reaksi segera Riza, Jho Low atau Khadem.

Akhbar berpengaruh New York itu melaporkan, pembelian AS$150 juta kediaman di bandar itu dan Los Angeles, serta beberapa karya seni, dibuat melalui syarikat tidak aktif.

Sebelum ini, The Wall Street Journal melaporkan bahawa Jabatan Keadilan AS dijangka menyita aset-aset yang dikaitkan dengan 1MDB – yang dirujuk sebagai sitaan terbesar dalam sejarah AS.

Sehingga kini, 1MDB belum memberikan sebarang reaksi berhubung perkara itu.


Posted: 20 Jul 2016 12:02 AM PDT

Pihak berkuasa Amerika Syarikat (AS) dijangkamenyita aset yang mempunyai kaitan dengan 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), demikian menurut laporan sebuah media antarabangsa negara itu  

Skala sitaan akan menjadi yang terbesar dalam sejarah negara kuasa besar dunia ituyang dianggarkan AS850 juta (RM3,400 juta), lapor The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) hari ini.

Memetik sumber, WSJ melaporkan, inisiatif bahagian aset Jabatan Keadilan Amerika Syarikat dijangka memfailkan saman sivil untuk mendapatkan kebenaran menyita aset-aset itu pada pagi ini (Rabu, waktu Amerika Syarikat).

Akhbar kewangan antarabangsa itu melaporkan sitaan akan melibatkan harta tanah dan aset lain yang dibeli dengan “wang yang didakwa disalah guna daripada dana Malaysia”.

Menurut laporan Malaysiakini, pihaknya sedang cuba mendapatkan reaksi 1MDB bagi mengesahkan laporan itu.

Akhbar itu  sebelum ini melaporkan, mereka yang dikaitkan dengan dana ini melabur berjuta-juta dolar dalam hartanah dan perniagaan di Amerika Syarikat.

Ejen daripada unit rasuah antarabangsa Biro Penyiasatan Persekutuan (FBI) sudahpun menjalankan  pelbagai siasatan secara meluas membabitkan jenayah terhadap individu serta institusi yang terbabit dengan  1MDB,  iaitu tabung yang ditubuhkan pada 2009.

Ia bertujuan memacukan ekonomi negara, sebaliknya menjadi sebuah syarikat yang dibebani pelbagai skandal kewangan dan hutang.

Penyitaan aset ini boleh dianggap sebagai langkah permulaan terhadap 1MDB oleh kerajaan Amerika Syarikat dalam konteks siasatan.

Belum diketahui jenis aset yang akan disita. Namun tindakan dijangka melepasi saman sivil yang dimulakan sejak 2015 bertujuan merampas aset bernilai kira-kira AS$850 juta (RM3.6b) membabitkan tiga syarikat telekom, menurut mereka yang mahir dengan kes seperti ini.

Mereka mengatakan siasatan masih berterusan.

Langkah menyita  aset oleh pihak berkuasa Amerika Syarikat terikat dengan tabung pelaburan oleh kerajaan negara asing,  dilihat sebagai tindakan mempergiatkan usaha global di pihak Washington bagi menentang penyelewengan dan rasuah.

Ia juga bertujuan menyekat kegiatan mendapatkan dana secara tidak sah (haram) melalui sistem kewangan dunia.

Tindakan oleh Amerika Syarikat ini dijangka akan menggugat hubungan baik antara Washington dan Kuala Lumpur – negara Islam sederhana – yang menjadi sekutu Amerika Syarikat begitu lama di Asia Tenggara.

Malaysia dikatakan amat rapat dengan Asia Barat selain dijadikan sebagai  penghadang (bulwark) dengan China yang dilihat semakin mencengkam kuasanya di Asia.

Presiden Barrack Obama memperteguhkan hubungan dengan Perdana Menteri Malaysia, Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak apabila bermain golf bersama di Hawaii pada cuti Krismas 2014.

Penyitaan aset yang akan dilaksanakan oleh Jabatan Kehakiman melalui satu inisiatif yang di namakan sebagai Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative yang ditubuhkan pada 2010 bertujuan menyasarkan kes-kes berkaitan rasuah di luar negara.

Kes terbesar olehnya ialah penyitaan bernilai AS$850 juta aset yang dikaitkan dengan rasuah oleh tiga kumpulan syarikat telekom global yang dikaitkan dengan anak perempuan Presiden Uzbekistan.

Kes berkenaan masih di peringkat timbangtara.

Ahad, 17 Julai 2016

"Malaysia kini sudah menjadi penakut dalam isu-isu membabitkan nasib dan masa depan umat Islam...tidak ada haluan sendiri. Ucapan pada sidang antarabangsa sudah longlai dan kaku.Inikah ‘pejuang dan panglima’ negara Islam kini? 

"Malaysia kini sudah menjadi penakut dalam isu-isu membabitkan nasib dan masa depan umat Islam...tidak ada haluan sendiri. Ucapan pada sidang antarabangsa sudah longlai dan kaku.Inikah ‘pejuang dan panglima’ negara Islam kini? 

Orang Islam yang membunuh tidak kiralah kepada sesama Islam atau ke atas penganut agama lain dihukum dan digelar dengan berbagai nama.

Ada menggelar pengganas, pelampau, pembunuh, malah menyebut mereka sebagai ‘setan’.

Bagaimana dengan penganut agama Buddha yang membunuh beribu-ribu rakyat beragama Islam di Myanmar, Thailand, China dan di beberapa negara lain?

Bagaimana dengan tindakan mereka membakar masjid dan rumah kediaman umat Islam? Bukankah mereka juga setan?

Adakah ‘pelampau Islam’ membakar gereja, kuil atau rumah ibadah lain sewenang-wenangnya seperti mana penganut Buddha membakar masjid?

Kita masih ingat bagaimana golongan muda di negara ini bersuara mengenai isu masjid Babri di India dan beberapa tempat lain, termasuk isu masjid Al-Aqsa. Namun kini? tanyalah diri sendiri.

Malah, perjuangan untuk Rohingya nampaknya banyak dilakukan oleh Barat, malah agensi berita Reuters - yang dilihat pro_Barat - pernah mengemukakan soalan, "Kenapa Tidak Ada Sesiapa Membantu Rohingya?"

Kita sedih dengan sikap negara-negara yang hanya menghukum pelampau Islam tetapi memejamkan mata kepada keganasan terhadap orang Islam,  tidak kiralah di mana juga.

Kita juga kesal kerana negara kita – Malaysia – kini sudah menjadi penakut dalam isu-isu membabitkan nasib dan masa depan umat Islam,  pada ketika pemimpin negara mengakui mereka ‘pejuang dan panglima’ negara Islam.

Malaysia hanya meminta Pertubuhan Islam (OIC) bertindak dalam isu Rohingya tetapi tidak menjadi penggerak atau pembuka langkah sebaliknya hanya mahu menjadi pengikut dan berlinadung di sebalik negara lain.

Kenapa terjadi begini? Apa posture dan strategi dasar luar kita?

Kita antara 34 negara Islam yang menyertai Arab Saudi untuk menentang keganasan Islam dan kerana itu mungkin kita dapat  balasan ‘derma RM2.6 bilion’. Namun apa kesannya?

Siapa yang melakukan pengeboman kononnya menentang ‘keganasan Islam’ di Syria? Ini jawapannya...

Kini seolah-olah negara  tidak ada haluan sendiri dan ikut sahaja apa yang berlaku. Ucapan pada sidang antarabangsa pun sudah longlai dan kaku!

Prioriti Perdana Menteri sendiri terhadap kedudukan kita dalam Pertubuhan Bangsa Bersatu, OIC, ASEAN, G-15, Pertubuhan Negara Berkecuali (NAM), APEC, ASEM pun sudah kabur.

Malah, dasar luar kita kini ibarat berada dalam jerebu yang ‘tidak berupaya memandang jauh’.

Kenapa kita tiba-tiba menjadi begitu lemah di persada antarabangsa berbanding kita juara ketika isu seperti  Bosnia-Herzegovina suatu ketika dahulu?

Berita Harian 2 September 1992

Kenapa kita tidak lagi berjuang untuk memajukan ekonomi negara Islam dan tidak lagi menjadi juara untuk pertubuhan ekonomi Islam seperti ketika Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad menjadi Perdana Menteri?

Apa jadi dan kesannya  Forum Ekonomi Islam umpamanya perhimpunan WIEF ke 11 di Kuala Lumpur pada tahun lalu. Apa kesannya mengenai usaha memperkukuhkan lembaga kewangan Islam, pengembangan usaha mikro, kecil, dan menengah serta pembiayaan syariah untuk industri kecil dan menengah di negara-negara Islam?

Juga sejak pengunduran Dr Mahathir, apa jadi dengan pergerakan Kumpulan Lapan Negara Islam Membangun (D8)?  Cetusan kerajasama ini dibangkitkan oleh Dr Necmettin Erbakan, bekas Perdana Menteri Turki pada satu seminar “Kerjasama Dalam pembangunan” diadakan di Istanbul in pada Oktober 1996. 

Kenapa dan apa masalah dengan Malaysia kini?

Kenapa kita lemah membuat pendirian mengenai nasib umat Islam yang diserang bertalu-talu di Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Yemen  serta beberapa negara lain di Afrika, sedangkan kita bukan sahaja membuktikan kita ‘juara negara Islam’ pada 1990-an - bersuara menentang kezaliman Barat pada Perang Teluk misalnya?

Apa sudah jadi dengan dasar luar dan ‘diplomasi politik’ Malaysia di pertubuhan antarabangsa?

Apakah dengan dasar berkecuali bermakna kita boleh berdiam diri? Istilah berkecuali dalam diplomasi antarabangsa ialah kita tidak berpihak tetapi perjuangan menegakkan keadilan menjadi keutamaan perjuangan dan dasar luar kita.

Kita juga sedih dengan peranan yang dimainkan oleh Pergerakan Pemuda UMNO yang berlebih-lebihan dalam isu tertentu di Malaysia.

Di mana mereka dalam isu antarabangsa? Kenapa Pemuda UMNO di bawah Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak,Tan Sri Abdul Rahim Thamby Chik, Datuk Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz atau juga ketika Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi begitu vocaldalam isu antarabangsa di era mereka?

Malah Biro Antarabangsa Pemuda UMNO dipimpin oleh Nazri Aziz dan Setiausahanya Mustapha Yaakob  dilihat biro yang sangat aktif dalam memperjuangkan isu antarabangsa dan masyarakat antabangsa yang tertindas.

Malah mereka turut bersuara kekejaman yang dilakukan terhadap masyarakat Islam di Asia Tengah, selain Asia Barat, di Balkan atau di mana jua.

Juga ada gerakan mengutip derma untuk masyarakat antarabangsa, bukan sahaja Islam di negara-negara yang rakyat mereka ditindas oleh pemerintah. Kini? Pemuda UMNO hanya mengharampkan ‘derma’.

Persoalannya, kenapa Pemuda UMNO sekitar 1980-an dan 1990-an, berani membuat kenyataan dan membuat pelbagai gerakan?

Kenapa mereka berani bertindak menyokong masyarakat antabangsa yang tertindas dan teraninaya?

Tetapi kenapa Pemuda UMNO kini membisu? Apakah kerana pemimpin utama UMNO berdiam diri dengan menunjukkan sikap pengecut, mereka turut menjadi ‘pengecut’?

Beraninya Pemuda UMNO pada 1980-an dan 1990-an kerana ketua mereka juga berani?

Sekawan itek berenang mengikut ketua mereka, jika ketua ke kiri, kekirilah mereka dan jika membelok ke kanan, ke kananlah mereka. Itulah kekuatan Pemuda UMNO sebelum ini tetapi sekarang?

Mohd Fakhrulrazi

Dalam isu Rohingya ini, kita menyokong penuh kenyataan Naib Ketua Pemuda AMANAH, Mohd Fakhrulrazi Mohd Mokhtar yang menyeru supaya pertubuhan Buddha di Malaysia  dapat berperanan untuk menyampaikan mesej mahupun tekanan kepada pelampau Buddha di Myanmar untuk menamatkan pembunuhan ke atas umat Islam.

"Saya percaya agama Buddha tidak bersetuju dengan apa jua bentuk keganasan. Oleh itu, kita minta organisasi berkaitan Buddha di negara ini berkongsi idea dan tampil berperanan. Penganut Buddha di Malaysia contohnya tidak bersikap seperti mereka di Myanmar’ “ katanya.

Beliau yakin rakan-rakan Buddha di negara ini dalam menyumbang idea dan peranan untuk menamatkan kezaliman dan pembunuhan terhadap masyarakat Islam di Myanmar," tambahnya lagi.

Setidak-tidaknya Pemuda AMANAH mempunyai pendirian.

Pemimpin PAS dan pemudanya juga berani dengan mnghadirkan diri diri dalam bantahan di Kedutaan Myanmar semalam.

Pemuda UMNO? Hanya sanggup ‘berperang’ dengan pemimpin DAP dalam negara tetapi tidak dalam isu-isu antarabangsa yang lebih menyeluruh.

Bangkitlah dan lihatlah kepentingan yang lebih luas jika kita mahu dihormati dan mendapat pengiktirafan rakyat.

Jangan berbangga dengan BAJU MERAH digunakan untuk ‘bertelagah’ sesama kita di dalam negara tetapi gunakan BAJU MERAH – warna kebanggaan UMNO itu -  untuk perjuangan isu-isu global.

Kalaupun benci dan marah dengan Dr Mahathir baca dan faham pendapat beliau bahawa:

1.      1. Beliau meramalkan Abad ked-21 adalah abad yang penuh ceria generasi muda yang lebih beretika, berilmu dan memahami roh tamadun dunia.  Bagi generasi muda, kata Dr Mahathir, mereka hendaklah berani merungkai ikatan budaya yang lapuk dan sebaliknya mengamalkan nilai ilmu yang lebih tinggi dan bermanfaat kepada dunia seluruhnya.

2.      2. Generasi muda abad ke-21 mesti memikirkan diri mereka adalah rakyat dunia. Manfaatkan teori dunia tanpa sempadan (lihat Kenichi Ohmae: Borderless World, 1989) dengan menghapuskan prejudis bangsa, politik, ekonomi, agama dan pelbagai lagi.

3.     3.  Generasi muda abad ke-21 mesti mengelakkan diri dan menghalang berlakunya perperangan antara tamadun dunia. Zaman informasi dan teknologi maklumat yang tinggi pada abad ke-21 itu perlu dimanfaatkan secukupnya dan seadil-adilnya supaya tidak ada negara yang akan terpulau. Mereka perlu membina kekuatan diri sendiri dan menjadikan tamadun dunia untuk satu bangsa saja.

Semua ini boleh di dapati jika membaca buku A New Deal for Asia (1999) iaitu sanggahan kepada propaganda ahli sains politik Amerika Syarikat, Samuel P Huntington melalui buku-bukunya,Clash of Civilisation (1993) dan Clash of Civilisation and Remaking of World Order (1996).

Inilah yang dinamakan sebagai ‘point counter point’ atau ‘hujah dengan hujah’ bukan jawapan merapu yang hanya untuk membela atau menyokong seseorang. Jawapan Dr Mahatahir tidak menyokong sesiapa tetapi pendirian intelektualnya.

Jadi kepada pemuda-pemuda di negara ini - masyarakat Islam di negara-negara yang menindas mereka memerlukan sokongan dan perjuangan kita  untuk bersama mereka.

Dan golongan muda, tidak terkecuali Pemuda UMNO, mereka  adalah harapan kita dan harapan mereka!

Plantation Boss Wanted Over Bill Kayong Murder - WORLD EXCLUSIVE

Plantation Boss Wanted Over Bill Kayong Murder - WORLD EXCLUSIVE

16 JUL 2016

WANTED – Dato’ Lee Chee Kiang

So politically well-connected is Dato’ Lee Chee Kiang that it seems that no one has so far dared to name him in Malaysia.

However, we can reveal that he is squarely cited in the charge sheets against others arrested over the fatal shooting of the land rights hero Bill Kayong, where he is named for having abetted the murder.

Lee is believed to have fled Sarawak for Australia at about the time Kayong was shot dead in his car at a traffic light in Miri, yet there has been no public notification so far that a  Red Notice Alert has been issued for his arrest and we ask if the Australian police are aware that a wanted Malaysian suspected killer is at large and believed to be in their territory?

After all, the charge sheet against Lie Chang Loon who appeared in court last week together with the man accused of shooting Kayong plainly reads:

“ together with Lee Chee Kiang (I.C. No.: 710816-13-5079) and other persons at large.. abetted one Mohamad Fitri Pauzi the commission of murder of Bill Anak Kayong..”

Named as an abettor in the murder of Bill Kayong in the charges laid against Lie Chang Loon

Tung Huat Plantation Battle

The murder of one of Sarawak’s best known land rights figures was immediately widely suspected as being linked to the gangster timber politics of the state.

Temenggong father and son were the original Directors of the company – note the ID number matches the charge sheet above

Indeed, the criminal nexus between land grabbing timber/plantation companies and top politicians, who hold undue influence over the forces of the law, has been perfectly illustrated in the case of Tung Huat Plantation, where Lee Chee Kiang is a Director and key shareholder.

For years native landowners have been locked in legal battles against the company, supported by land rights lawyer Abun Sui and campaigner Bill Kayong, who are both linked to the opposition PKR party – Kayong was a candidate at the state election.

Temenggong Lee (left) received his extension from SUPP Vice President just before the murder

Lee Chee Kiang, on the other hand, is very closely linked to BN’s SUPP party, whose local election battles have been heavily financed by Najib personally (as million ringgit cheques signed by him at the general election bear testimony).

Lee’s father and fellow director, Lee Sie Tong, is none other than the present Temenggong of Miri, known to have close ties to the SUPP.

On June 1st that post was extended in a ceremonyofficiated by an SUPP Vice President, the Tourism Minister Lee Kim Shin, who openly congratulated Temenggong Lee for having “been instrumental in getting the community to support the Barisan Nasional (BN) government“.

Together with his son, the Temenggong is not only a Director of Tung Huat Plantation they are the major shareholders also.

Father and son – Major shareholders and directors of Tung Huat plantation, as well as movers and shakers in Miri politics

Despite this prominent communal role the struggle involving Tung Huat has been one of the worst examples of violence and bullying towards local communities in recent years in Sarawak.  Radio Free Sarawak has reported on the issue since 2011 and civil rights campaigners have raised ongoing major concerns throughout this period.

Tua Rumah (headman) was attacked with parangs in his car Central Miri

Bill Kayong himself and other campaigners had received unrelenting verbal threats from Lee himself and gangsters allegedly paid by him for months, often receiving up to 20 phone calls a day, according to people close to the case.

Meanwhile, a series of appalling violent attacks had been launched against the local Iban community affected by the Tung Huat Niah Plantation in Sungai Bekelit.

In one incident late last year the headman was run off the road by gangsters, who were in a vehicle registered to the plantation company and slashed with a parang.

In a string of other incidentscars have been burnt out,houses firebombed and gangsters have been reportednumerous times arriving at the village to intimidate locals who had mounted blockades.  In some cases they were reported for deliberately running people over in their vehicles, landing them in hospital.

How Radio Free Sarawak reported the issue on Friday 27th November


Yet, despite the unrelenting violence against villagers, local leaders and campaigners have complained that the police did precisely nothing to protect their safety.

Brought to court yesterday – Mohamad Fitri Pauzi

To the contrary the villagers’ legal representatives found that instead the company had started mounting cases against them, denouncing them in the courts for incitement.

After months and years, during which local people were forced to stand their ground without the support of the forces of law and order, campaigners believe that the owners of Tung Huat Plantations came to the conclusion that they could act with impunity.

And in the case of the fugitive Dato’ Lee Chee Kiang it appears from the present charges that he decided that he could threaten the main political campaigner against his plantation and then order that those threats be carried out.

Accomplice – Lie hired Fitri according to the charges

Sarawak Report has been told by those with knowledge of the case that Lee Chee Kiang had started asking around for local mercenaries in the absence of any police action against the earlier outrages, which had plainly been carried out by those associated with his company.

It is alleged that Lee approached Lie Chang Loon (one of the two in custody), who in turn sub-contracted the shooting to Mohamad Fitri Pauzi (also now apprehended and charged).

Yet, when the two men were brought to court yesterday and remanded on these charges there was no mention by the jubilant police force of the names of the other suspects they are hunting.  Nor did the local papers name the key suspect for commissioning the crime, although they too have had access to the charge sheet information.

All the Borneo Post dared hint was that “A Dato’ ‘Mastermind’ is on the run“!

“Lie was charged together with one Lee CK and two others still at large for abetting Mohamad Fitri in the commission of the murder of the activist”

was the only coy reference to the identity of the “mystery Dato’ from Borneo Post.

SUPP Connection

Happier days! Ex- SUPP Chief Peter Chin stands arm in arm together with the alleged shooter Mohd Fitri Pauzi (centre) on the BN campaign trail!

The shocking extent to which the SUPP/BN political connections of this suspected gangster, Lee Chee Kiang, continues to protect him in Sarawak could not be clearer than the failure to even name him as the prime suspect in this murder.

Meanwhile, Sarawak Report has obtained the above picture of the very man accused of pulling the trigger, earlier standing side by side with the former SUPP boss Peter Chin on the BN campaign trail.  The tall and muscular hit man, Mohamad Fitri Pauzi, has his arm draped over the shoulder of his political leader in a gesture of close affection.

Bill Kayong – a popular campaigner who got in the way of financial interests of politically connected Tung Huat Plantations

Had the young man seen his contract to eliminate a charismatic opposition figure, who was getting in the way of the financial interests of SUPP-connected figures, as somehow part of a political mission in Sarawak?

It is time that the rulers of the state end their deafening silence over the shocking circumstances of this case and denounce the politically connected company, which benefited from the failure of the police to stand up to their criminal behaviour.

It is also time that Peter Chin spoke out to clarify SUPP’s position with relation to the Tung Huat Plantation company – in particular does he or any other SUPP politician hold shares or interests (or nominee shares or interests) in this company and, if not, why does he believe the police have for years failed to address its gangster activities against the locals whom SUPP are supposed to represent?

Finally, it is high time that the violent intimidation of the natives of Sarawak by greedy companies, who have raped their lands with the full support and backing of the political establishment, was ended.

Chief Minister Adenan Satem has claimed he wants more autonomy, but what hope is there for natives that their interests will be any better protected by a stronger state government, which has allowed such a state of affairs to develop?

A violent campaign which ended in murder at this traffic light in Miri – and with the powerful main suspect on the run

Jumaat, 15 Julai 2016



Posted: 13 Jul 2016 06:38 PM PDT

"UMNO dan BN perlu berwibawa untuk membawa reformasi pemikiran dan tindakan politik yang jauh meninggalkan perjuangan mereka yang ‘kecewa’...berjuang untuk rakyat dengan membuktikan siapa ‘yang dekat di hati rakyat dan benar-benar mengambil berat soal rakyat’."

Jangan cepat melatah atau membuat spekulasi awal kalaupun benar bekas Perdana Menteri Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad akan menubuhkan parti baru.

Lihat dan dengar dulu apa kata ‘orang tua itu’. Membuat kenyataan secara pra-pengumuman menunjukkan sikap penakut dan perasaan bimbang dengan berita itu.

Bukan Dr Mahathir yang kata beliau mahu tubuh parti baharu.

Kenyataan datang daripada pengikut setia Mahathir, Datuk Seri Khairuddin Abu Hassan yang  mendedahkan bahawa terdapat rancangan untuk menubuhkan sebuah parti baru yang mungkin diterajui oleh bekas perdana menteri itu.

Dengan mengatakan Dr Mahathir perlu menubuhkan sebuah parti baru kerana pembangkang menganggap dirinya sebagai liabiliti, ia tidak membawa apa-apa kesan pun kerana perjuangan Dr Mahathir adalah bagi tujuan ‘Selamatkan Malaysia’.

Apapun, kita juga mahu tahu apa itu selamatkan Malaysia. Selamat daripada apa dan siapa? Bukan sekadar isu rasuh dan penyelewengan, juga bukan sekadar kempen Anti-Najib.

Yang penting apa perjuangan parti itu untuk membanteras jenayah, tembak-menembak,  keamanan negara dan sebagainya. Bagaimana dengan dasar luar kita, ke arah mana?

Semalam Menteri Pelancongan dan Kebudayaan Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz menyambut baik langkah itu kerana ia cara yang sah untuk menentang kerajaan secara demokrasi> Namun,  anggota Majlis Tertinggi UMNO itu yakin parti baru itu akan mencatatkan prestasi lebih teruk daripada bekas parti serpihan Umno Semangat 46.

Ini berdasarkan kemenangan besar Barisan Nasional (BN) pada pilihan raya kecil berkembar bulan di Sungai Besar dan Kuala Kangsar.

Maknanya, tubuhlah parti apa pun, ia tidak akan mengguris UMNO atau BN sedikit pun.

Namun, beberapa persoalan boleh dilihat dalam penubuhan parti baru ini (jika benar berlaku).

Pertama,  siapa menjadi tulang belakangnya

Ramai mengatakan ia berkisar sekitar 3M - Dr Mahathir, Muhyiddin dan Mukhriz.

Namun, mungkin daripada 3M itu ia menjadi ‘HUSAM’, iaitu Datuk Husam Musa, Datuk Seri Shafie Afdal serta 3M yang akan menjadi tulang belakang parti baharu itu.

Malah, Tun Dr Mahathir mungkin akan membawa mereka yang berpengaruh seperti bekas Menteri Pengangkutan. Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik.

Walaupun Nazri secara berseloroh tetapi memperkecilkan keupayaan pemimpin berkenaan dengan mengatakan:  “Muhyiddin akan jadi timbalan, Mukhriz sebagai ketua pemuda, (bekas Ketua Wanita Umno) Rafidah Aziz sebagai ketua wanita dan Khairuddin jadi budak bancuh teh, ” pengaruh mereka tetap ada.

DR Ling mungkin masih berpengaruh di kalangan masyarakat Cina.

Kedua, kemasukan pemimpin parti tradisi, termasuk PKR

Mungkin juga akan ada pemimpin dari parti UMNO, PAS dan parti-parti lain, tidak terkecuali, PKR akan tertarik dengan gerakan Dr Mahathir ini.

Memang benar parti baru ini akan menjadi ‘rumah baru’ kepada mereka yang ‘marahkan UMNO’ tetapi tidakkah ini akan merugikan BN dalam konteks mendapatkan undi dalam pilihan raya?

Kenapa tidak ada usaha untuk ‘memujuk’ mereka agar undi tidak hilang?

UMNO boleh berbangga dan bermegah mempunyai tiga juta ahli tetapi bagaimana dengan undi untuk BN?

Kalaupun mereka menyertai parti baru ini, yang nyata mereka akan tetap bersama berjuang dalam Pakatan Harapan yang akan menjadi semakin membesar hasil gabungan parti baru yang akan ditubuhkan ini.

Pada ketika pemimpin UMNO mengatakan pembangkang sedang menghadapi masalah, mereka juga perlu ‘lihat cermin’ dalam BN sendiri.

Husam Musa...tidak berminat?

Jangan perkecilkan pengaruh Husam, bukan sahaja di Kelantan tetapi di kalangan ‘golongan muda’.

Di pihak UMNO dan BN, basih banyak isu yang perlu diselesaikan antara parti, termasuk dalam isu ‘pemberontakan ketua cawangan UMNO’ kesan pemecatan Muhyiddin, Mukhriz dan Shafie, selain isu RUU 355, kuasa autonomi Sarawak serta pembahagian kerusi untuk bertanding dalam pilihan raya umum akan datang.

UMNO juga berdepan dengan krisis sendiri seperti berlaku di Terengganu, selain perlu memantapkan kedudukannya di Kedah, Pahang, Perak dan Sabah.

Ketika ini yang dilihat sedikit tenang ialah di Melaka, Negeri Sembilan dan Johor.

Sokongan NGO Kepada ‘Selamatkan Malaysia’

Mungkin mereka tidak menyertai parti baru ini atas apa juga alasan. Namun jika mereka menyokong dan bersimpati dengan gerakan Dr Mahathir dan kumpulan ‘HUSAM’ itu, akan menyebabkan keadaan yang tidak baik untuk UMNO/BN

Perlu diingat bahawa NGO terdiri daripada kumpulan pekerja, belia, pelajar institusi pengajian tinggi, kumpulan anak seni, penulis, penggerak masyarakat, wanita, puteri dan pemuda serta agamawan adalah kumpulan yang merasakan mereka juga perlu layanan baik.

Sejauh ini UMNO dan BN dilihat tidak mendekati golongan ini dan mereka dibiarkan ‘bertaburan’. Sedangkan mereka adalah tenaga penggerak penting masyarakat dan kumpulan ‘pengundi muda’.

Suara mereka bagaikan tidak didengari oleh UMNO dan Barisan Nasional. Bagaimana jika mereka menyokong parti baru ini dalam pilihan raya?

Kumpulan Majoriti Senyap dan Maklumat Internet

UMNO dan BN mengharapkan media arus perdana dan cyber-trooper mereka untuk memenangkan hati rakyat.

Mungkin, mereka berjaya di dua PRK Kuala Kangsar dan Sungai Besar. Mereka berjaya kerana tumpuan 100 peratus dan yang menentang pula PAS dan parti yang baru mahu bertapak, Parti Amanah Negara (AMANAH).

Namun pada pilihan raya umum nanti, masing-masing pihak menjaga kawasan masing-masing dan pandai-pandailah ‘membawa diri’.

Tidak jelas sejauh mana kumpulan ‘majoriti senyap’ di dua kawasan Parlimen itu, namun pada pilihan raya umum akan datang, kumpulan ini dijangka bangkit untuk menyatakan ‘pendirian mereka’

Tidak semestinya semuanya menentang kerajaan tetapi kemungkinan membantah terghadap isu-isu penting negara yang diperkatakan seperti penyelewengan, rasuah, salah laku dalam pentadbiran kerajaan Pusat dan negeri akan menjadi faktor yang menguntungkan pembangkang.

Bagaimana jika mereka – kalaupun tidak mengundi pembangkang tetapi tidak mkeluar mengundi menyokong kerajaan?

Berjuang melalui gagasan Pakatan Harapan

Memang sukar sebuah parti baharu bergerak memandangkan kini sudah ada parti yang asasnya berlandaskan kaum dan agama.

Kita perhatikan kedudukan kini dalam konteks parti politik di Malaysia:

1.      UMNO – berlandaskan bangsa Melayu dan Islam (terbuka untuk Bumiputera di Semenanjung dan Sabah), ditolak untuk berkembang di Sarawak;

2.      PAS – berlandaskan Islam dan Melayu (terbuka untuk sokongan bukan-Islam melalui Dewan Himpunan Penyokong PAS (DHPP));

3.      PKR – parti pelbagai kaum dan tidak merujuk kepada perjuangan agama tertentu;

4.      DAP – mendakwa untuk pelbagai bangsa tetapi majority bukan-Melayu;

5.      MCA – parti untuk orang Cina;

6.      MIC – parti untuk orang India;

7.      PBB – berbagai kaum pribumi Sarawak dan tidak terikat kepada Islam;

8.      AMANAH – serpihan PAS untuk Melayu –Islam.

Namun jalan tetap terbuka untuk parti baharu ini menawarkan alternatif sebagai parti berbagai kaum dengan menekankan kepada Islam progresif.

Bukan Melayu dan bukan Islam tidak akan bimbang kepada pendekatan ini jika parti benar-benar berjuang untuk melindungi ‘orang bukan Islam’ bukan mengeluarkan fatwa yang boleh meragukan rakyat bukan di negara ini.

Yang penting ialah parti ini menghormati dan menjaga kepentingan bukan-Melayu dan bukan-Islam bukan memperjuangkan Islam secara yang radikal atau tidak mengamalkan ‘kesederhanaan Islam yang tulen’.

Walaupun ada pihak mengatakan banyak parti sudah lingkup kerana tidak dapat melawan UMNO umpamanya parti Semangat 46 yang pernah dianggap terkuat pimpinan Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah dan oleh Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim tokoh yang amat kuat masa beliau jadi timbalan perdana menteri menubuhkan tubuhkan PKR, kes kali ini berlainan sekali.

‘Selamatkan Malaysia’ Jadi Gagasan

Kali ini UMNO bukan berdepan dengan isu pembangunan, kronisme, perbezaan kaum dan pendapat atau reformasi tetapi isu penyelewengan, salah laku dan rasuah selain ke mana Malaysia akan di bawa di masa hadapan.

Dengan kata lain, masa depan bagaimana untuk generasi Malaysia akan datang.

Ini menjadi satu persaingan yang sengit dan UMNO serta BN perlu bersedia melawannya.

UMNO dan BN tidak perlu gentar tetapi gerakan ini  tetap menjadi ancaman.

Masa kurang dua tahun ini perlu digunakan oleh UMNO untuk memperkuatkan kedudukannya dan meminimumkan seboleh mungkin segala persepsi buruk rakyat terhadapnya.

‘Perang BN melawan pembangkang’ jangan lagi berasaskan kononnya pemimpin pembangkang menjadikan fitnah, tuduhan atau kritikan palsu sebagai modal.

Fakta hendaklah dibalas dengan fakta dan hujah menentang dan mempengaruhi hujah.

Jangan bandingkan parti baru yang mungkin ditubuhkan oleh Dr Mahathir ini seperti AMANAH.

Semalam Menteri Kemajuan Luar Bandar dan Wilayah, Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob dalam sidang media di kementeriannya berkata “...dalam negara kita bebas masing-masing nak tubuh parti, tubuhlah. Sedangkan Mat Sabu pun rasa layak dia tubuh parti dia.”

Jangan perkecilkan kemampuan parti lain kerana kita tidak tahu apa kan belaku dalam tepoh dua tahun ini.

Yang nyata perjuangan parti baru itu mirip perjuangan gerakan Selamatkan Malaysia – bukan sekadar untuk ‘menggulingkan Perdana Menteri Datuk Seri Najib Razak’  tetapi melaksanakan pembaharuan institusi dan perjuangan kea rah masyarakat yang lebih progresif, termasuk dalam konteks Islam.

UMNO dan BN mampu melawan ‘badai’ ini dengan syarat pemimpinnya tidak dihanyutkan oleh sikap selesa dan terlalu yakin.

Jentera partinya, termasuk tentera siber memerlukan pendekatan pengisian baru.


Dengan kedudukan entiti baru ini  berjuang untuk rakyat, seperti juga UMNO dan BN, masing-masing perlu membuktikan siapa ‘yang dekat di hati rakyat dan benar-benar mengambil berat soal rakyat’.

Selain itu yang penting, UMNO dan BN perlu berwibawa untuk membawa reformasi pemikiran dan tindakan politik yang jauh meninggalkan perjuangan kalangan mereka yang ‘kecewa’.

Apa pun, semuanya ditentukan dengan pengumuman jam 3 petang ini di Yayasan Kepimpinan Perdana, Putrajaya.

Khamis, 14 Julai 2016

Special Purpose Con Job?

Special Purpose Con Job?

14 JUL 2016

Information now emerging from the Auditor General’s Report, led DAP Finance Spokesperson Tony Pua to state yesterday that he suspects that much of the money paid in 2014 to the bogus Aabar Limited BVI company was in fact circulated back through 1MDB’s Brazen Sky bank account in Singapore in an attempt to con Parliament and the auditors that cash had been “redeemed” from the so-called Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV), which had allegedly invested US$2.3 billion in the Cayman Islands.

“it occurred to me that the 1MDB Financial Statements for the year ending 31 March 2014 were signed off by the auditors, Deloitte coincidentally on 4 November 2014, when 1MDB GIL also made a payment of US$222 million to Aabar (BVI).” says Pua.

“At that point in time, there was increasing concern over 1MDB’s US$2.318 billion investment in an obscure investment fund based in Cayman Islands.  The Board of Directors minutes have shown that the Management were repeatedly instructed to redeem the investment and repatriate the proceeds back to Malaysia throughout 2014. The company was under immense pressure because the authenticity of the investment was being publicly questioned…. 

The accounts were finally signed off by Deloitte when 1MDB was able to “show” the auditors that US$1.22 billion have been redeemed.  The money was however, not repatriated to Malaysia.”

It is a shocking suggestion, because it would mean that two Swiss banks, BSI and UBS, would have been involved in helping shift these suspicious transactions through their Singapore branches – in some cases turning round hundreds of millions of dollars in one day, according to the figures.  This is because BSI managed the Brazen Sky account and UBS managed the bogus Aabar Limited account.

Sarawak Report has now examined the Auditor General’s analysis of this alleged ‘redeeming’ and ‘repatriation’ of the SPV cash (see full excerpt beneath) and the figures in his report lend weight to Pua’s suspicions.

However, the AG complains he cannot reach a solid conclusion on the matter, because of the incomplete and limited information provided to him by the company.

“JAN [Audit Dept] was unable to verify 1MDB GIL’s subsequent payments or how the funds redeemed from the (SPC portfolio) funds were used because important documents such as bank statements and payment vouchers were not handed by 1MDB for JAN’s verification despite five requests being made between May and October 2015. Documents such as bank statements should be readily available to bank clients.” [8.12]

Such criminal obstruction of its own ought to demand severe action against managers, whom the Public Accounts Committee have called for the police to investigate.

What emerges from Chapter 8 on the Cayman SPV and supposed repatriation of the cash is yet again a litany of appalling bad practice at 1MDB, changing stories and missing money. The Auditor General officially confirms what critics have long suspected, which is that 1MDB serially lied to parliament and the public and utterly failed in its duty:

“The issues that were uncovered depict a company which had made unwise business decisions, took high risks and was not in line with 1MDB’s status as a Government-owned strategic development company to help develop the country.”[8.29] the Auditor General angrily concludes.


The figures from Chapter 8, make very interesting reading when compared to the bank transfer documents we publicised earlier in the week, which showed payments from 1MDB Energy and 1MDB Global to the Singapore UBS account of Aabar Limited during the relevant period in 2014.

The AG’s figures show the cash transfers that were allegedly made from the Cayman Island SPV to 1MDB’s Brazen Sky account at BSI Bank in Singapore Sept-December 2014 as the ‘cash’ was allegedly ‘redeemed’ through a number of transactions.

First look at the money that the Auditor General records as having arrived into Brazen Sky from anonymous portfolios linked to the fund during late 2014 (bearing in mind he complains he was not given any of the bank statements of the company to prove its financial status or the origin of the cash):

“Difficulties in obtaining important documents such as the Brazen Sky bank statements and 1MDB GIL statements resulted in JAN not being able to verify the transfer of funds or payment of Aabar’s termination of option and interest payments” [AG Rpt 8.26.g]


The money allegedly arriving in Brazen Sky from the SPV in the Caymans, according to figures provided to the Auditors Deloittes and later the Auditor General

Second, look at Sarawak Report’s table of money flows obtained from the bank transfers to the UBS Aabar Limited account from 1MDB Energy And Global, published earlier this week.

Sarawak Report’s summary of the information provided by the 9 transfer documents submitted to the auditor

Finally, combine the two tables to see how virtually identical over-all sums were sent to the fake Aabar by 1MDB Energy and later 1MDB Global to those which arrived back a few days later in the Brazen Sky Singapore account – and were then forwarded straight on/back to 1MDB Global.

One two occasions the same multi-million sums left 1MDB Global to fake Aabar and then arrived back there (via Brazen Sky) on the very same day: US$255,500,000 on October 23rd and then US$222,222,000 on November 4th.  Tony Pua would seem to have a point!


As Pua points out it was on November 4th, after the key figure of US$1.22 billion was flushed through Brazen Sky, that the auditors Deloittes finally agreed to sign off the belated accounts for that year on the basis that this money had been ‘redeemed’ from the Cayman Islands.

Except, the AG points out that instead of being repatriated to Malaysia to pay 1MDB’s pressing debts as had been demanded again and again of management by the Board, this money was sent on to 1MDB Global’s BSI bank account in Lugano instead.

Or should we say it was SENT BACK to 1MDB Global’s BSI bank account in Lugano from where it had come in the first place?

The PetroSaudi black hole

What the evidence surely shows is that there was no money in the Caymans to be sent back in the first place and this was nothing more than a desperate cover-up and an audit con-job that went to extraordinary lengths.

Indeed, once the money had been ‘redeemed’ to Lugano 1MDB management made sure to write it off straight away, claiming the money had been immediately spent on terminating options and paying off loans.

What everyone who has followed 1MDB knows is that the original US$1.83 billion PetroSaudi investment, which was to go through no less than four different ‘investment strategies’ in as many years, to the Auditor General’s major disapproval, was actually stolen right from the start.

Jho Low’s Good Star Limited snaffled US$700 million on Day One, then a further US$330 million later in 2011. US$260 million was siphoned into the buy out of UBG in 2010 and the remainder went to PetroSaudi itself in return for its services in “acting as a front”.  The formerly two-bit company bought itself a drill ship and purchased a lucrative drilling concession in Venezuela on the proceeds of its “joint venture”.

So, when 1MDB claimed in 2012 that it had ‘cashed in’ its share of the PetroSaudi venture  for a fancy profit of US$2.3 billion they were defying the laws of mathematics and common sense. Who would have paid such money for an empty shell?

Hence began the series of twisted and turning shadowy tales about the supposed Special Purpose Vehicles, conveniently hidden in the Caymans with off-shore bank accounts, allegedly ‘investing’ in ‘portfolios’ that it was claimed could be translated back into solid cash.

No one believed Shahrol Halmi at the time and they will believe him even less now that they have seen how the money circulated round 1MDB in late 2014, with the help of the friendly off-shore fake Aabar and compliant Swiss bankers in Singapore.

The Auditor General was outrageously denied the full information he was owed to explain exactly what happened here, but what all the evidence suggests is that 1MDB started pumping money it had borrowed for its Energy and Global subsidiaries through the fake Aabar, so that it could then be sent on to Brazen Sky posing as cashed in profits from the separate Cayman Island portfolios.

No wonder that during this very November 2014 the management had started drafting resolutions to explain why 1MDB Global might need to pay money to Aabar – the remaining US$1.5 billion from their 2013 Tun Razak Exchange loan was about the only significant remaining ready cash available in the group.  Hence the agreement to ‘extend the Aabar guarantee’ to this loan as well, in order to find an excuse to pay for the privilege. Aabar’s parent company IPIC have confirmed they knew nothing of the deal – the money went to the fake Aabar of course.

So, while the AG was not given the statements to prove this is what happened, his remarks could not have delivered a clearer official verdict of utter condemnation that nothing that was done was done correctly or honestly by 1MDB (see below).  No wonder the Public Accounts Committee notified the police.

Remaining US$993 million

There was of course the alleged remainder of the SPV/Cayman money that the Board had called on 1MDB to return no less than 9 times for over a year:

The AG listed the occasions the Board had asked for the PetroSaudi/Cayman Islands money to be returned without success

The remaining money was US$993 and 1MDB had explained to the Board it would need to be used to pay off yet more options to the fake Aabar, for which purpose it was allegedly also paid to the Brazen Sky account.

Except, there turned out to be no money here either as the AG details in painful stages. First 1MDB had claimed they had sold the remaining SPV to fake Aabar again, because it was “as good as cash” although the market apparently was not keen on buying the SPV notes at that particular time.

Then the deal was reversed into an alleged cash sale, which turned out to be merely notes.   The Auditor established that there was no cash in the BSI account, which was plainly why 1MDB had had to borrow real cash from Deutsche Bank to pay its mounting obligations, based on the supposed collateral which turned out to be notes not cash.

When the truth because known in April 2015, Deutsche Bank pulled its loan and 1MDB had to pull its favours with the corrupt Aabar officials, who dragged IPIC into a bail out. The Auditor provides a useful further insight into the terms of that secretive ‘Term Sheet’, which finally expired on June 30th with 1MDB having failed to fulfil its obligations to IPIC, sparking legal action and a demand of US$6.5 billion, now facing the Malaysian taxpayer.

Many had asked what assets 1MDB had promised Aabar in return for its loan, as referred in that binding term sheet.  The answer, found the auditor, was that no one at 1MDB or Aabar actually seemed to know – even a year later. Because 1MDB had yet to demonstrate what were genuine assets and what were fake.

Read the Chapter 8 Translation

Chapter 2, Item 8 – Redeeming of investment portfolio from Segregated Portfolio Company (SPC)


8.1       The investment in the SPC was made through the Investment Management Agreement signed on Sept 12, 2012. Between the period of Sept 2012 and Sept 2013, the (initial) investment of RM6.8 billion (USD2.318 billion) saw a returns of RM662 million, which is dividends of RM445.93 million and capital distribution of RM216.07 million as stated in the financial statements for the year ending March 31, 2014.

8.2       In response to criticisms that was raised in Parliament and through the media regarding the investment portfolio in the SPC which was managed by fund managers in the Cayman Islands, the Board had on May 20, 2013 agreed that the investment be redeemed in stages to improve public perception towards the credibility of 1MDB’s investments. In relation to this, the Board had issued 9 instructions between May 2013 and Aug 2014 to the Management to prepare a plan, schedule and (ultimately) redeem the SPC portfolio funds either in stages or as a whole, according to this schedule:

Table 2.3 – Board’s instruction regarding redeeming of SPC investment

Board Meeting NumberDate of MeetingInstruction3/201320/05/2013Prepare plan and schedule of for redeeming of funds in stages5/201319/08/2013Prepare plan and schedule of for redeeming of funds in stages6/201311/11/2013Liquidate investments in stages and return funds to Malaysia1/201427/01/2014Opportune moment to redeem investments in view of high value of USDSpecial27/02/2014Management to take immediate action in redeeming funds and returning it to Malaysia3/201422/04/2014Redeem funds as soon as possible although there are no needs for cash in the near term. Funds could be used in local institutions.4/201410/06/2014Redeem at least 1/3 of the portfolio investments on Sept 30, 2014 or all on March 31, 2015.5/201421/07/2014Redeem 1/3 of the portfolio investment on Sept 30, 2014 and all March 31, 2015. Management is instructed to redeem funds on those dates6/201418/08/2014Redeem everything before or on Dec 31, 2014.

Source: Board of Director’s meeting minutes.

8.3       However, no action was taken by the 1MDB management although there were specific clauses in the Subscription Agreement which allows the client to liquidate the funds at any time with a 30-day notice. The readiness of the management to liquidate the portfolio funds in a month was also confirmed by Hazem (then 1MDB CEO) during the Board Meeting on June 10, 2014.

8.4       Following repeated instructions from the Board, eventually, a portion of the SPC portfolio funds amounting to USD870 million were redeemed in mid-October 2014 while another USD300 million was redeemed a few days later. This was informed to the Board on Oct 20, 2014.

8.5       On Nov 4, 2014, Hazem informed the Board during a meeting that a total of USD1.2 billion from the SPC Portfolio Funds were redeemed. It was used to pay the interest on a loan and Aabar Investment PJS’s termination of option in order to secure 49% equity in Powertek Investment Holdings Sdn Bhd and 1MDB Energy (Langat) Sdn Bhd. During the same meeting, the chair of the Board had informed Messr Deloitte (who was present during the meeting) that the balance of the SPC portfolio investment would be redeemed before the end of November 2014 and gave a guarantee that he would oversee the redeeming of the funds.

8.6       During the meeting on Dec 20, 2014 Azmi (1MDB CFO) had informed the Board that the latest USD1.392 billion was redeemed from the SPC portfolio and the balance of USD939.87 million will be redeemed by the end of December 2014. The Board was also informed that the entire SPEC portfolio funds were used as collateral for the USD975 million loan from Deutsche Bank. The Board opined that it was unfair to use the entire SPC portfolio fund, valued at USD2.318 billion, as collateral when the loan from Deutsche Bank amounts to only USD975 million. Lodin (Board chair) raised the issue of 1MDB management not informing the Board regarding the collateral and that he and Ismee had given a guarantee to the BNM governor that money redeemed from the SPC portfolio investment would be brought back to Malaysia.

8.7       This information contradicts Arul Kanda’s statement to the PAC on Dec 1, 2015, in which he said that USD1.22 billion from the SPC portfolio funds were not used as collateral because it was already redeemed. Only the balance of USD1.11 billion from the SPC portfolio funds along with dividends of USD120 million were used as collateral with Deutsche Bank for the USD975 million loan. However, checks by JAN found that (Arul Kanda’s) statement was inaccurate because between Nov 14 and Nov 24, 2014, an additional USD173.5 million was redeemed, bringing the total amount redeemed from the SPC portfolio investment to USD1.392 million. All funds that were redeemed were transferred into the account of 1MDB GIL and only the balance of USD939.87 million which were not redeemed could be considered as collateral for the loan from Deutsche Bank.

8.8       Further checks by JAN on the Facility Agreement found that the conditions of the loan did not include clauses which support the statements of both Azmi (Dec 20, 2014) and Arul Kan (Dec 1, 2015). The conditions for the loan are as follows:

Table 2.4 – Condition for the USD975 million loan from Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore Regarding the SPC Portfolio Fund Collateral

ClauseCondition20.2 (b)Brazen Sky shall ensure that the Brazen Sky net worth will not at any time be less than USD1,500,000,000.22.2 (b)With effect from the date which is six momths from the utilisation date, the borrower and Brazen Sky shall ensure that, at all times thereafter, the amount standing to the credit of Brazen Sky Account is at least equal to the Brazen Sky Required Balance.



Brazen Sky Account – Bank Account in Hong Kong

Brazen Sky Required Balance – a cash amount of USD600 mil up to a maximum of USD1,170 mil; USD500 mil plus aggregate of each Accordion Increase Amount x 1.2 [?]

Source: Facility Agreement USD975 mil

8.9       The Board, during a meeting on Dec 20, 2014 was also informed that Deutsche Bank AG, Singapore had agreed to allow USD993, from the USD1.392 billion redeemed fromt he SPC funds, to be used for Aabar’s termination of option payments. The balance of USD399 million was used to pay the interest of the USD Note.

8.10     However, details of the USD993 million payment to Aabar for the termination of option and the payment of interest for the USD Note could not be verified by JAN. The board also sought details on the payment on Dec 20, 2014, but JAN’s checks showed that the matter not raised during the subsequent Board meeting. During the Feb 23, 2015 meeting, the Board had raised questions regarding the payment for Aabar’s termination of option which was only told to the Board after payment was made. This demonstrated that the payment for Aabar’s termination of option was made without the approval of the Board.

8.11     During a meeting between 1MDB and JAN on Sept 9, 2015, 1MDB had said that the physical payment to Aabar was made through the account of a 1MDB subsidiary – Brazen Sky Limited (Brazen Sky) through BSI Bank – on behalf of the terminating company because 1MDB did not own an account abroad. However, checks by JAN found that funds redeemed from the SPC portfolio amounting to USD1.392 billion which were transferred to Brazen Sky’s bank account between Sept 11 2014 to Nov 24 2014 were transferred to 1MDB Global INvestment Limited (1MDB GIL) between SEpt 12 2014 and Dec 8 2014 amounting to USD1.417 billion. An analysis on Brazen Sky’s transactions between Sept until December 2014 found that there were no payments for the purpose of the Aabar termination of option. Details of Brazen Sky’s transactions are as follows:

Chart 2.5 – Brazen Sky Limited Transactions for Period Between September and December 2014

TransactionsIn (USD)Out (USD)11/09/2014Portfolio C2110,000,000.02 12/09/20141MDB GIL 94,420,000.0007/10/2014Portfolio C2146,518,719.52 Portfolio C1228,481,280.48 1MDB GIL 375,000,000.0014/10/2014Portfolio B2280,045,600.00 Portfolio C1104,954,400.00 1MDB GIL 340,000,000.0023/10/2014Portfolio A227,099,840.00 Portfolio B1198,247,200.00 Portfolio B230,152,960.00 1MDB GIL 255,500,000.0031/10/2014Portfolio A193,292,800.00 31/10/2014Dividends131,707,200.00* 04/11/20141MDB GIL 222,000,000.0014/11/2014Portfolio A2125,000,000.00 1MDB GIL 125,000,000.0024/11/2014Portfolio A248,500,000.00 26/11/20141MDB 43,168,213.17*08/12/20141MDB GIL 5,500,000.00TOTAL1,392,292,800.021,417,420,000

Source: Brazen Sky Limited Bank Statement, obtained from foreign authorities

Note (*): Not included in total amount

8.12     The transfer of funds redeemed from the SPC portfolio from Brazen Sky to 1MDB GIL was found to be in contravention of the instructions from the 1MDB Board, which has demanded that the funds be brought back to Malaysia. The Board’s approval was also not sought for this transaction. The reason for the transfer to 1MDB GIL by 1MDB’s management could not be ascertained because 1MDB GIL has its own investment assets with fund managers amounting to USD1.56 billion on March 31, 2014. 1MDB GIL had also obtained a USD Note loan amounting to USD3 billion. JAN was unable to verify 1MDB GIL’s subsequent payments or how the funds redeemed from the (SPC portfolio) funds were used because important documents such as bank statements and payment vouchers were not handed by 1MDB for JAN’s verification despite five requests being made between May and October 2015. Documents such as bank statements should be readily available to bank clients.

8.13     After redeeming USD1.392 billion from the SPC portfolio, the Board on Nov 13, 2014 urged (the management to) redeem the balance of USD939.87 million before the end of November 2014. The same instruction was given again on Nov 25, 2014.

8.14     On Jan 12, 2015, the Board voiced their disappointment with the 1MDB management who had previously given the impression that the SPC funds would be brought back (to Malaysia) but as of that day, it had not happened. The situation then became more complicated because 1MDB was facing serious cash-flow problems in its attempt to repay a RM2 billion Maybank loan and payment obligations for equity in the 3B Project [Note: Jimah power plant] at the time.

8.15     During the same meeting, Arul Kanda had informed the Board that the balance of the SPC portfolio funds amounting to USD939.87 million was redeemed and held in the form of cash since Dec 31, 2014. This was in line with what Azmi told the Board on Dec 20, 2014 – that the balance would be redeemed by end-2014.

8.16     However, checks by JAN found several statements which raises doubts on whether the balance of the SPC funds amounting to USD939.87 was in the form of cash or units. An analysis on the statements made between Jan 12, 2015 until Mar 3, 2015 showed that the redeeming of SPC funds in the cash amounting to USD939.87 had taken place. However, checks by JAN found that the sum of USD939.67 did not exist in Brazen Sky’s bank account during the period. The chronology of statements regarding the redeeming of SPC portfolio investment is as follows:

Table 2.6 – Chronology of statements regarding redeeming of the balance of SPC portfolio investment funds amounting to USD939.87 million

 StatementSource12/01/2015Mr Arul updated the Board that the balance of USD939,874,085 had been redeemed and had been held as cash since Dec 31, 2014.Special Board Meeting07/02/2015Mr Arul: “The cash is in our accounts and in US dollars. I can assure you (about that) … I have seen the statements”.The Business Times, Singapore, Feb 7, 2015.23/02/2015Mr Arul informed the Board that, per the terms of the Deutsche Bank loan taken out in Sept 2014, there is a need for the USD975 million loan to be cash-collateralised at USD1.20 for every USD1.00 of the loan, by March 2, 2015. He therefore recommended, and that Board agreed, that the loan be repaid from the remaining USD939 million cash proceeds from the redemption of the investment portfolios held by Brazen Sky Limited, and the balance from the proposed Government of Malaysia loan.Board meeting No 1/201503/03/2015Mr Arul updated the Board that further to the Board decision on Feb 23, 2015 he had instructed the CFO to utilise the proceeds of Brazen Sky Limited redemption to repay in full the USD975 million Deutsche Bank loan on March 2, 2015. However, the CFO informed him today that BSI apparently declined to apply the proceeds in that manner until they received a suitably worded indemnity from Deutsche Bank to release BSI from any liability in relation to application of the funds in that manner.Special Board meeting

Source: 1MDB board minutes and news articles

8.17     Arul Kanda’s statement to the Board on March 3, 2015 raises the question of why BSI had previously shown no objection towards the transfer of the monies from the SPC portfolio investment amounting to USD1.417 billion between Sept 12, 2014 until Dec 8, 2014. This appears to show that 1MDB’s management did not provide the correct or complete information regarding the SPC investment (money) to Arul Kanda. Arul Kanda had frequently attributed the information he was presenting during Board meetings to Azmi (CFO) and Terence (Executive Director, Finance). During PAC’s meeting on Dec 1, 2015, Arul Kanda also acknowledge that his understanding of the redeeming of SPC funds was learned in stages. Azmi and Terence, as the directors of Brazen Sky, should have provide details about the SPC portfolio investment to Arul Kanda.

8.18     During the Board meeting on March 24, 2015, Arul Kanda explained, based on information supplied by Azmi, that Aabar agreed to purchase the balance of the SPC portfolio investment fund amounting to USD939.87 million from Brazen Sky at the same value. Checks by JAN found that the agreement that was referred to was the Asset Sale Agreement signed on Jan 1, 2015 between Brazen Sky and Aabar Investments PJS Limited (Aabar Ltd). The agreement was made by 1MDB management to ensure that the receipt of funds redeemed from the balance of the SPC portfolio can done before March 31, 2015 in accordance to the wishes of the Board. The redeeming of the funds was done through an agreement because Brazen Sky was of the opinion that the SPC fund managers were unable to redeem the SPC funds through normal redeeming processes because of weak market sentiments at the time. However, it was found that the agreement was signed without prior knowledge of the Board and shareholders.

8.19     Checks by JAN also found that the sale of the balance of SPC portfolio investment to Aabar Ltd contradicts Clause 21.4 (a) in the USD975 million Facility Agreement by Deutsche Bank – “No obligor shall enter into a single transaction or a series of transactions to sell, lease, transfer or otherwise dispose of any asset.” This showed that the management had acted against the instructions of the Board which required the redeeming of SPC portfolio investment before the end of Dec 2014 and that the proceeds be brought back to Malaysia. The management’s justification for not carrying out the instruction in January 2014 can be disputed because the value of the USD at the time was high. 1MDB’s management should rightfully not be concerned about losses during the redeeming process because the value of the SPC portfolio investment was guaranteed by Aabar Investment PJS on the principle value.

8.20     Arul Kanda also told the Board on March 24, 2015 that Azmi had explained that the redeeming of the entire SPC portfolio investment had happened in early January 2015. However, a sum of USD939.87 which should be received from Aabar was still in the SPC portfolio fund structure. Since 1MDB’s management took into consideration of Aabar’s credit position and the good relations between the two companies, the agreement in which Aabar takes over the SPC portfolio investment was considered to be “as good as cash”. However, without the cash payment, 1MDB was unable to repay its debt of USD975 million to Deutsche Bank or prepare a cash collateral of USD1.17 billion for the loan.

8.21     Following this, the Board through a resolution dated March 25, 2014 agreed with a proposal by Azmi and Terence for Brazen Sky to terminate the Asset Sale Agreement, dated Jan 2, 2015, with Aabar Ltd and replace it with a Share Sale Agreement. According to the proposal, all equity in Brazen Sky is to be sold to Aabar Ltd at a consideration value of USD1.20 billion and the first payment of USD300 million must be made before April 30, 2015. The purpose of selling Brazen Sky was to fulfill the condition set by Deutsche Bank regarding the cash collateral of USD1.17 billion which must be prepared by Brazen Sky on behalf of the lender – 1MDB Energy Holdings Ltd. The shareholders agreed with the proposal via a resolution on March 25, 2015. However, this document was not presented to JAN because 1MDB’s management said that the deal was not yet finalised. All statements to the board on March 24, 2015 – beginning with the Asset Sale Agreement and proposed Share Sale Agreement – give the impression that information is being changed according to the situation, in which the balance of the SPC portfolio investment which was initially said to have been redeemed in cash, but is now reported to be in the form of units.

8.22     Thus, Aabar Ltd’s commitment to uphold their end can be questioned because Azmi had told the Board on April 23, 2015 that the balance of USD939.87 which should have been received by Aabar Ltd was still in the structure of the SPC portfolio investment because Aabar Ltd had yet to confirm when the payment should be made. Meanwhile, Arul Kanda told the Board on May 11, 2015 that the takeover of Brazen Sky by Aabar Ltd had yet to take place.

8.23     However, on May 25, 2015 the Board was informed that negotiations with Aabar were taking place, in which IPIC/Aabar were to takeover a portion of 1MDB Group’s assets alongside obligations for two USD Notes amounting to USD3.5 billion. The Board was also informed that the agreement and advance payment of USD1 billion will be finalised by the end of May 2015. This is the third time the redeeming of the balance of the SPC portfolio investment and negotiations with Aabar/Aabar Ltd was changing in shape.

8.24     On May 28, 2015 the Board approved through a resolution to have a Term Sheet for Settlement Arrangements (Binding Term Sheet) between 1MDB Group, Ministry of Finance Inc (MKD), International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) and Aabar Investments PJS Groups (Aabar). The Binding Term Sheet was signed by all four parties on May 28, 2015. Among the important terms in the Binding Term Sheet was that IPIC will pay 1MDB USD1 billion before or on June 4 2015 and takeover the obligation to pay interest and principle for the two USD Note – each amounting to USD1.75 billion. According to Arul Kanda’s explanation to the Board on June 14, 2015, the Binding Term Sheet did not state in detail which assets would be transferred to IPIC/Aabar because it is still under negotiation. Among the assets which have been identified amounts to USD4.892 billion, consisting of a deposit amounting to USD1.4 billion for the IPIC guarantee on the USD Note, 1MDB GIL investment fund amounting to USD1.56 billion, the SPC portfolio investment amounting to USD939.87 million and payment for the Aabar termination of option amounting to USD993 million. Three important issues have been set for the following dates:

A definitive agreement must be implemented by July 31, 2015Transfer of assets at the minimum value of USD1 billion to IPIC/Aabar by Dec 31, 2015Transfer of the balance of asset that have been identified by June 30, 2016

 8.25     On June 5, 2015, 1MDB had received the advance of USD1 billion from IPIC under the Binding Term Sheet through its subsidiary Brazen Sky. Based on the shareholders resolution on May 28, 2015 and resolution by the Board dated June 2, 2015, the sum was to be used for the payment of USD50 million in fees to Yurus Private Equity I and the balance was for the Deutsche Bank loan amounting to USD975 million.

8.26     Issues regarding the redeeming of SPC Portfolio INvestment for the period between 2013 and 2015 are as follows:

Payments for the Aabar termination of option were not put before the Board for prior approvalProceeds of funds redeemed from the SPC portfolio amounting to USD1.392 billion was not brought back to Malaysia as instructed by the 1MDB BoardProceeds redeemed from SPC portfolio amounting to USD1.417 billion were shifted to 1MDB GIL but the Board was told that it was used for the Aabar termination of option payment amounting to USD993 millionDifficulties in obtaining important documents such as the Brazen Sky bank statements and 1MDB GIL resulted in JAN not being able to verify the transfer of funds, payment of Aabar’s termination of option and interest paymentsThe Asset Sale Agreement signed on Jan 2, 2015 between Brazen Sky and Aabar Ltd for the sale of the balance of SPC portfolio investment amounting to USD939.87 milllion to Aabar Ltd was signed without the knowledge of the Board or shareholders.The value of the first redeeming process (USD1.392 billion) and the balance which will be taken over (USD939.87 million) amounts to USD2.33 billion, which is almost the same as the initial investment amount of USD2.318 billion on Sept 12, 2012. This shows that the SPC portfolio investment did not make significant gains.The change in statements on the balance of the SPC portfolio investment – first it was said that it was redeemed and kept in cash on Dec 31, 2014, subsequently it was stated that it was taken over by Aabar Ltd on Jan 2, 2015, but still regarded as “good as cash” although no money was received.

8.27     In summary, 1MDB’s initial investment through PetroSaudi in 2009 which involved a large sum did not bring foreign investment into Malaysia, which was not in line with the objective of establishing the company. […] 1MDB’s early investments through funds from the issuance of IMTN bonds amounting to RM5 billion saw a change in investment instruments four times. Beginning with the USD1 billion equity investment in 2009 through the JV with a subsidiary of PetroSaudi International Limited, followed by the investment in Murabahah Note (USD830 million/RM2.59 billion) in 2011 and 2012, until it was changed to into the SPC portfolio investment amounting to USD2.318 billion in Cayman Islands on Sept 2012. A portion of the SPC portfolio investments was redeemed in 2014 and used to finance various commitments and its investments. This investment resulted in a balance of USD939.87 million in the form of SPC portfolio investment units on March 31, 2015.

8.28     The decision to switch from one investment instrument to another within a short period of time while involving large sums showed that the investment decisions were not made in accordance with a proper management structure and does not appear to have a long term strategic investment plan.

8.29     Issues that were uncovered depicts a company which had made unwise business decisions, took high risks and was not in line with 1MDB’s status as a Government-owned strategic development company to help develop the country. It should be managed in accordance to best practices in order to safeguard the company and Government’s interest.