1. Amatlah mengagumkan bagaimana Datuk Seri Najib berjaya berpura-pura bodoh dan cuba putar belit isu berkait saya menerima RM2.6 juta dari UKSB.
2. Najib cuba untuk menyamakan dengan isunya menerima RM2.6 billion yang masuk ke dalam akaunnya dan mendakwa diberi oleh Raja Arab yang sehingga hari ini tidak wujud atau tampil membuktikan kenyataan Najib.
3. Selain itu, dua mahkamah dan empat hakim telah dapati dia bersalah tujuh tuduhan pecah amanah, salah guna kedudukan dan pengubahan wang haram dana RM42 juta milik SRC, sebuah anak syarikat 1MDB.
4. Najib juga sedang dibicara di dalam mahkamah berkaitan kes 1MDB di atas empat pertuduhan menggunakan kedudukannya untuk peroleh suapan berjumlah RM2.3 billion dalam dana 1MDB dan 21 pertuduhan pengubahan wang haram berjumlah RM2.3 billion tersebut.
5. Kesemua aliran wang tersebut ada paper trail dan digital footprint dan kesemuanya terkait dengan Najib.
6. Ini berbeza keadaan dengan kenyataan David Tan dari UKSB di dalam mahkamah iaitu duit itu diberi melalui anak saudara saya Tan Sri Rahmat dan bukannya kepada saya.
7. Tidak ada bukti duit masuk akaun saya atau saya terima duit itu atau David Tan melihat duit itu diserah pada saya.
8. Yang ada hanyalah kenyataan David Tan yang bersandar pula kepada ledgernya digelar Buku 555.
9. Tan Sri Rahmat telah keluar kenyataan nafi dia serah apa-apa duit pada saya. Tan Sri Rahmat juga terangkan dia ada terima wang RM1.3 juta tetapi ini adalah imbuhan untuk jawatan sebagai pengerusi dan penasihat UKSB.
10. Dia telah letak jawatan di UKSB tidak lama kemudian dan serah kembali wang RM1.3 juta. Tan Sri Rahmat juga ada surat dan dokumen berkait dengan apa yang dinyatakannya.
11. Memang pun saya tidak pernah terima duit tersebut.
12. Ini sesuatu yang amat mudah di faham dan Najib memang faham. Dia berpura-pura tidak faham kerana dengan itu dia dapat terus bohong dan tipu untuk tutup kesalahannya menyamun wang rakyat.
13. Malangnya, dengan berpura-pura bodoh, Najib dapat terus perbodohkan penyokongnya.
SOALAN YANG APANDI PERLU JAWAB
1. Apandi ingin tahu asas dan sebab keputusan dibuat untuk tidak teruskan cadangan menuntut semula Batu Puteh sebagai milik Malaysia.
2. Saya telah jelaskan perkara ini berkali-kali. Yang perlu dijelas ialah bagaimana Apandi mencadang penyelesaian kes Jho Low dengan tawaran Jho Low untuk bayar kepada Kerajaan Malaysia sebanyak satu billion lima ratus juta Ringgit.
3. Apandi telah mendakwa dahulu bahawa tidak ada kesalahan yang dibuat oleh Datuk Seri Najib dalam kes 1MDB. Ini bermakna Jho Low juga tidak bersalah.
4. Jikalau tidak bersalah apa sebabnya Jho Low bercadang bayar satu setengah billion Ringgit kepada Kerajaan Malaysia. Cara orang yang tidak bersalah ialah dengan kembali ke Malaysia dan sanggup dibicara di mahkamah.
5. Tetapi Jho Low masih tidak sanggup kembali ke Malaysia walaupun sanggup menghubungi Apandi. Kesanggupan Apandi menerima tawaran Jho Low tentulah kerana Apandi sekarang akui yang Jho Low bersalah.
6. Lagi pun Najib didapati bersalah dengan ke semua tuduhan di mahkamah apabila dibicara. Sekaligus keputusan Apandi bahawa Najib tidak melakukan apa-apa kesalahan, ditolak oleh mahkamah apabila Najib dibicara. Ini bemakna Apandi cuai dalam menjalankan amanah sebagai AG.
7. Yang menjadi soalan ialah apakah jenis hubungan Apandi dengan Jho Low semasa ia memutuskan bahawa tidak ada apa-apa kesalahan yang dibuat oleh Najib. Jika ada hubungan maka ‘conflict of interest’ berlaku. Keputusan Apandi menghalang mahkamah dari membicara kes Najib dan juga melindungi Jho Low.
8. Adalah penting siasatan dibuat berkenaan hubungan Apandi dengan Jho Low.
KOLUSI DAN SUBAHAT?
1. Laporan-laporan berita bahawa Tan Sri Apandi Ali bertindak sebagai orang tengah untuk Jho Low amatlah mengejutkan.
2. Pertamanya, Apandi ketika menjadi Peguam Negara telah menyatakan tidak berlaku sebarang jenayah berkaitan dengan 1MDB serta menyucikan Perdana Menteri ketika itu Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
3. Pendirian Apandi itu berlaku di waktu beberapa Negara luar telah mengambil tindakan terhadap bank-bank dan orang persendirian yang terbabit dengan jenayah 1MDB.
4. Kerana itu apabila Pakatan Harapan mengambil-alih Kerajaan, perkhidmatan Apandi tidak dilanjutkan kerana sikap dan tindakannya menyucikan 1MDB secara langsung adalah kegagalannya melaksanakan amanah dan tanggungjawab Negara.
5. Selain itu, tindakannya juga secara langsung mempertahankan jenayah-jenayah yang telah dilakukan oleh Najib dan sekutu-sekutunya termasuklah Jho Low.
6. Hari ini hakim-hakim mahkamah tinggi dan mahkamah rayuan telah mendapati perlakuan jenayah tetap berlaku di dalam 1MDB dan menghukum penjara Najib Razak kerana kesalahan-kesalahan berkaitan 1MDB.
7. Sepatutnya Apandi merasa bersalah dan menyesal kerana pendiriannya menyekat jenayah 1MDB dari dihadap ke mahkamah.
8. Sekarang, dia sanggup menjadi orang tengah untuk Jho Low mendapat penyelesaian dan diberitakan dengan membayar Kerajaan Malaysia RM1.5 billion. Ini bermakna Jho Low bersalah. Jika tidak bersalah kenapa menawar wang untuk menyelesaikan tindakan terhadapnya.
9. Sekali lagi Negara dan rakyat Malaysia ingin dianiayai oleh Apandi dan Jho Low dengan tawaran penyelesaian sejumlah wang yang sebegitu kecil berbanding dengan pencurian wang negara berjumlah puluhan billion ringgit.
10. Tindakan Apandi yang sanggup bersekongkol dengan Jho Low amat mencurigakan.
11. Kesediaan Jho Low membayar untuk penyelesaian membukti bahawa Jho Low mengakui kesalahan.
12. Sekali lagi Apandi seharusnya mengambil sikap menyesali kesilapan atau kesalahannya yang dahulu dan bukannya mengambil upah (saya tidak percaya Apandi melakukan kerja orang tengah Jho Low secara percuma) dari penjenayah 1MDB yang Apandi telah bebaskan dahulu.
13. Di sini timbul kecurigaan bahawa kerjasama Apandi dengan Jho Low telah bermula semasa dia Peguam Negara.
14. Satu siasatan perlu dilakukan terhadap Apandi sama ada dia membuat keputusan menyucikan 1MDB dahulu kerana hubungannya dengan Jho Low.
15. Ini bukan sahaja satu conflict of interest. Lebih dari itu, ia adalah satu jenayah terancang untuk mencuri harta rakyat dan Negara dan ini membabitkan bukan sahaja Najib dan Jho Low tetapi juga Apandi.
16. Kerajaan hari ini bertanggungjwab untuk menyiasat kerana terdapat unsur kolusi (collusion) dan subahat (complicity) Apandi di dalam jenayah 1MDB untuk memastikan penyamun-penyamun Negara yang terbabit di dalam jenayah terancang ini diadili dan dihukum.
PLUNDERER’S TWIST
1. It is amazing. Najib is at it again. He is blatantly blaming others for the situation that he himself created.
2. Yes, the country is lagging behind its neighbours. Correct. But it is due to Najib’s corruption of the Government. It is due to the huge amounts of money he borrowed which have now disappeared. It is due to the projects he started which were not only overpriced but favoured the other parties. It is due to the projects being of little benefit to the country. And of course due to having to pay to settle the huge debts incurred by him. There is no money left to develop the country.
3. What does he expect the government which defeated him to do? Overlook all the crimes he has committed?
4. Who is he asking to focus on the economy? It cannot be PH as he has engineered the back door change of government; not once but twice.
5. Obviously the first change was not to his liking. Now he has managed to have his party as the Government. Well ask his party, ask the UMNO PM, why are we lagging behind now that Najib’s party is in power?
6. Big companies are leaving the country in droves. Everyone complains that getting approvals or permission for anything take months if not years. Only when money is paid will the permission be granted. Even meeting the ministers require bribes to make it possible. And frequently the ministers refuse to meet investors. Even the PM is not available.
7. In one project, a statement was made that the project is 90% completed, when even the ground has not been broken.
8. A high-speed train only saves time if it covers a long distance. For short distances the time saved is insignificant. And HSR is very costly.
9. Yes, we have to pay RM320 million to Singapore. That is because Najib made that silly agreement. Carrying on would drain the treasury more, at a time when we need to pay money for Najib’s borrowings.
10. Incidentally I am reading a novel about England a thousand years ago by Ken Follett. He tells of a crooked bishop caught red handed forging coins. The case was tried before an alderman who was his brother.
11. Instead of the sheriff prosecuting, the bishop prosecuted. He declared that he was in the coin workshop because he was going to arrest the counterfeiters.
12. In fact he was gloating over the counterfeit money he was forcing the jeweller to produce when the sheriff and his man at arms arrived. He was furious and was screaming at the sheriff.
13. But in his prosecution he named the counterfeiter as the culprit. The man protested and said he was forced to manufacture the coin by the bishop. Witnesses to the truth were dismissed.
14. The jeweller was declared guilty of counterfeiting and sentenced to be blinded and castrated. And the sentence was carried out immediately in full view of the town people.
15. That was justice in England of 10th century. It sounds like Najib’s twisting of facts and accusing others of the crimes he had committed. He stole billions of Ringgit which affected the development of Malaysia. Yet he puts the blame on PH which he brought down through the back door.
CORRUPTION AND ELECTION
1. There was a time when Malaysia was admired as the best developed of the countries achieving independence after World War II. From a poor British colony, it became an Asian Tiger with GDP growth of 8% plus. It was believed that the growth would continue and Malaysia would become a developed country by 2020.
2. But today Malaysia is behind even Vietnam and Indonesia in terms of economic growth and political stability. A country that had changed Government democratically every five years, is now ruled by Governments which slipped in through the back door.
3. And these Governments are weak and liable to be overthrown by 3 Members of Parliament crossing over. It has happened once and it can happen any time.
4. The backdoor Governments are only concerned with sustaining enough support to remain in power.
5. The people have become apathetic, not caring what happens to the country. The Federal Government is made up of the parties rejected by the people in the 14th General Election because of corruption, stealing money and money laundering. It has no idea about administration. A dominant leader even declared that money borrowed by the Government need not to be paid.
6. Corruption is rampant and bureaucratic hassles deter investors. In the Johor state elections voters admit accepting money from the party that won.
7. One would have thought that the people would reject corrupt politicians. But no. They are winning elections to the point that they could form Governments after state elections. They truly believe that if general elections are held in the near future, they would win with good majorities through bribing the voters.
8. They believe, and apparently, they have good grounds for so believing, that the voters could be corrupted. And they have enough money to offer, because the money they had stolen from the Government is still with them.
9. It is even possible that a convict would be pardoned and be chosen as the Prime Minister of Malaysia. The convict had already admitted that as PM he stole money, abused power, laundered stolen money and live a high life. Will he do it again? The chances are that he will.
10. What will happen to the country? Does not matter. The important thing is the money he is giving out. It may be stolen money. But that is his problem. You did not steal the money. It was given to you. So, take it even if it lasts only a day or two. Give him the vote.
11. That was the thinking in Melaka and in Johore. Will that also be the thinking in the 15th General Election!!
KELUHURAN UNDANG-UNDANG
- Malaysia berbangga dengan dakwaan bahawa kita berpegang kepada keluhuran undang-undang atau “the rule of law”. Tetapi kita diberitahu terdapat juga kedudukan above the law – atau pihak yang tidak tertakluk kepada undang-undang.
- Perlembagaan tidak menyebut adanya keadaan tidak tertakluk kepada undang-undang. Tetapi terdapat beberapa peristiwa yang undang-undang dicabul dengan bebas. Pihak berkuasa bukan sahaja tidak bertindak tetapi mempermudahkan pencabulan berkenaan.
- Rakyat tidak senang dengan keadaan ini. Jika ada peristiwa pencabulan undang-undang bagaimanakah mereka akan dapat perlindungan. Mereka berhak mendapat penjelasan setakat mana undang-undang boleh dicabul. Dan oleh siapa. Tanpa penjelasan berkenaan undang-undang yang tidak perlu dipatuhi, rakyat mungkin melaku sesuatu yang mendedah mereka kepada tindakan tertentu.
- Sesungguhnya rakyat Malaysia amat “timid” atau mudah takut. Hanya jika disoal oleh polis mencukupi untuk menakutkan mereka. Sebab itu mereka tidak pun berani mengadu jika dicabul, atau berdepan dalam arena politik jauh sekali menjadi calon untuk parti lawan. Mereka akan suarakan penentangan mereka secara tersembunyi kerana mungkin akan disoal oleh polis atau sesuatu tekanan akan dikenakan kepada mereka. Ini sering diguna oleh pihak tertentu untuk melumpuh pihak lawan.
- Dalam keadaan ini pihak tertentu bebas berrasuah dan berjenayah, jika mereka berkuasa.
- Hasilnya ialah negara mengalami pentadbiran yang buruk kerana sebenarnya tidak terlaksana the rule of law.
- Akan hancurlah negara tercinta ini.
NATO
1. Immediately after Germany was defeated in the Second World War, the Western Alliance made it clear that the new enemy was Russia, their partner in the war against Germany.
2. A “defence” grouping of the European countries and the United States of America was set up with the obvious exclusion of the Soviet Union. It was equally obvious that the enemy to be defended against was Russia.
3. Not surprisingly Russia set up the Warsaw Pact, an alliance of East European countries to deter the Nato nations from any aggressive acts against the Eastern Bloc and Russia.
4. A costly Cold War resulted with Nato and the Eastern Alliance convening and attempting to get the countries of the world to join the Western countries or the Eastern “Communist” bloc.
5. Proxy wars and regime change were attempted as the European tried to line up the countries of the world in support of the two groups. Eventually the Russians realised the futility of the confrontation between the two blocs. Under the leadership of Gorbachev, the Warsaw Pact was disbanded and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics were allowed to break up. Many communist countries of Eastern Europe and Central Asia became independent.
6. Not so Nato. Far from disbanding Nato went all out to gain more members especially among the former Warsaw pact countries. The Russians were not invited. They were apparently still the enemy.
7. The membership drive by Nato came ever closer to Russia.
8. The Russian military had been weakened by the break up of Soviet Union. Nato simply regarded the weakening of the Russian defensive strength as a godsend. This did not affect the Nato countries from recruiting more members especially among those close to Russia. War games were held among Nato countries, again directed at Russia.
9. Russia rearmed as Nato got more members and came closer to Russia.
10. One of the agreements between the Nato countries is that an attack on one would be regarded as an attack against all the Nato countries.
11. What is the implication in the present situation. Ukraine is not yet a member. If Russia attacks, Nato is not obliged to war against Russia. On the other hand if Ukraine is accepted as a member of Nato, an attack by Russia would result in war with Nato.
12. And war between Nato and Russia would escalate into a third world war. And nuclear weapons would be used.
13. Russia is not likely to accept defeat. Nor will Nato. And so again the Europeans will destroy the world.
OUT OF CONTEXT
1. The report on what I said at the meeting with Malays is not accurate. I am not asking Malaysia to claim the land that we had lost. I am trying to point out that we are so concerned over losing a table-size rock but never about bigger parts of Malaysia when they were taken from us. Losing Pulau Batu Puteh is no big deal. It was the mistake of the Johore Government to deny that the rock belonged to Johor. Had that denial not been made, there would be no dispute now.
2. We should be grateful that the world court awarded Pulau Ligitan and Sipadan to us. They are much more valuable than Pulau Batu Puteh – just a rock outcrop. We should be thankful that Indonesia has not disputed the award. Really, we are not grateful for our gains.
THE RULE OF LAW
1. Every country, every society, every organisation needs rules and laws. Without them there would be anarchy, a state of disorder and confusion which would lead to the society eventually disintegrating. In such an anarchy nobody would feel safe. Everyone will be in a state of fear.
2. But for various reasons certain individuals are placed above the rules and the laws. Still to ensure justice and fair treatment for everyone, being above the rules and the laws does not mean that the laws and rules would be totally disregarded.
3. For example, the laws forbid killing or murder. Being above the law does not mean that murder can be committed with impunity. And there are many laws, rules and policies which cannot be breached even by those above the law.
4. Those who are exempted must still avoid breaches which are harmful to society or to individuals. In other words, being above the laws does not mean total disregard for the laws, the rules and regulations.
5. It is fortunate that in Malaysia privileges are not often abused. Even if the privileges are abused, Malaysians are tolerant and forgiving. But of course, we do not know the limit of such tolerance. It is far better to avoid abuses. The privileged must bear this in mind.
PEGGING THE RINGGIT
- Bank Negara knows best about the management of the Ringgit. It should not be pegged.
- However, I am curious about how pegging the Ringgit in 1998 helped in the economic recovery of Malaysia. I say this because even the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank agreed that Malaysia did the right thing.
- Admittedly, the financial situation then was worse than now. And our reserves then was not as big as now. Still, we overcame the financial and economic problems caused by the depreciation of the Ringgit through pegging the Ringgit at RM3.80 per USD.
- When the Ringgit is pegged would it cause the outflow of foreign investments in Malaysia? From the little that I know about finance, outflows of foreign investment is due to the expectation of further depreciation of the Ringgit or shares. When the Ringgit was pegged there would not be further depreciation against the USD. Assured of the value of their investments, the need to divest was removed.
- Let’s say an investor invested 1 million USD at the time when the Ringgit was stronger – say RM 3.80 per 1USD. Effectively his investment would be worth 3.8 million Ringgit in Malaysia. This value would be sustained when the Ringgit is pegged.
- But if the Ringgit depreciates to 4.5 to 1USD, he would get only 844,000 USD from his 1 million Dollar investment should he divest. Fearing further depreciation he would change the Ringgit into USD and get out with 844,000 USD. He would have lost 156,000 USD.
- A merchant importing in USD would have to change RM4,500,000 to get 1 million USD if the Ringgit depreciates to 4.50 Ringgit to 1 USD. Obviously when the Ringgit depreciates, the cost of I million imports in USD would be RM4,500,000.
- On the other hand, if the Ringgit is pegged at 3.80 the cost of import would be only 3.8 million Ringgit per 1 million USD. A pegged Ringgit would save 700,000 Ringgit in the cost of import.
- When the Ringgit depreciates the cost of production would be lower if there is no pay revision upwards. On the other hand, the cost of imported raw materials and components would increase and negate the gain from lower wages. Logistical cost would also increase, again reducing the gain from production cost. A depreciated Ringgit does not necessarily reduce cost of production.
- Assuming that the Ringgit remains pegged at RM3.80 per USD, the cost in Ringgit would not change. Budget estimates would be sustainable.
- Wherever an importer wishes to buy something in U.S. Dollar, the Central Bank should have enough USD to sell at the pegged rate i.e. RM3.80 per USD.
- In 1998 the Central Bank had less reserves. We did not know whether the reserves were held in cash, and if in cash, in what currency. Still, we were able to change Ringgit into USD so as to pay in USD. Now the Central Bank has more reserves in USD, I believe. Earnings in USD should be deposited with the Central Bank, in exchange for Ringgits. There should be no shortage of USD when needed.
- There were problems of course. But we were able to set up subcommittees to deal with them in 1998. This included the recapitalisation of banks and businesses.
- The fact remains that the pegging was successful. As mentioned above the IMF and World Bank admitted that Malaysia did the right thing and helped other countries to overcome the serious devaluation of their currencies also. We were even able to deal with CLOB, the stock market set up by Singapore.
- I am just curious. We have more savings and reserves now compared to 1997- 8. Yet I am told that if we peg, we may go bankrupt?
- And neither have they suggested any possible solutions?