We are still waiting for Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim's explanation as to WHY he caused 1MDB to drop the US248 million(RM1.25 Billion) suit against Riza Aziz(Najib's stepson)? The silence of the Finance Minister(also Prime Minister) is most disturbing.
The trial, which began in October 2024, saw testimony from former 1MDB CEO Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi and ex-1MDB general counsel Jasmine Loo Ai Swan. Yet, on February 24, 2025, the plaintiffs abruptly withdrew the case on the final day of trial, just as the defendants were set to close their arguments.
Why did 1MDB withdraw the case - an opportunity to get from Riza and others a sum of RM1.25 Billion and more in damages/cost? Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim, the Minister with the power to ORDER and/or Instruct 1MDB to withdraw the suit has been SILENT - no explanation to the people of Malaysia to date. WHY?
On
July 5, 2019, Riza — who is also co-founder of the Hollywood production
house Red Granite Pictures and son of Najib’s wife Datin Seri Rosmah
Mansor — was charged with five counts of money-laundering under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (AMLATFA)....According to the charges read to him before the court, Riza allegedly
received a total of US$248 million (RM1.03 billion) on five occasions
between 2011 and 2012. He was accused of committing the offences
by receiving the money through the bank account of Red Granite, the
Hollywood production company he co-founded.
The 'much controversial agreement', as read out in court that led to RIZA being DNAAed...on 14/5/2020?
According to the charges read to him before the court, Riza allegedly received a total of US$248 million (RM1.03 billion) on five occasions between 2011 and 2012. He was accused of committing the offences by receiving the money through the bank account of Red Granite, the Hollywood production company he co-founded.
Below is the full statement as read out in court by Sri Ram, who confirmed it when contacted by Malaysiakini after proceedings today.
“Since the filing of the charges against the accused, he has made several representations through his solicitors to the relevant authorities. These representations have been considered most carefully by those concerned and a decision has been arrived at as follows.
“An agreement has been arrived at between the prosecution and the accused under the terms of which the Federal Government will receive a substantial sum running into several million ringgit. The sums have direct reference to the subject matter of the charges framed in this case. The accused has throughout this process received adequate and competent legal representation.
“As a consequence of the agreement arrived at, the charges framed against the accused will not be proceeded with for the present pending the completion of the agreement. The prosecution with the consent of the accused now respectfully moves the court for an order of discharge not amounting to an acquittal.
“If there is satisfactory completion of the agreement then appropriate steps will be taken to ensure that the accused obtains a full acquittal. But if there is no satisfactory completion of the agreement reached, the prosecution reserves its right to reinstate the charges and to prosecute the accused to the full limit of the law.”
That deal that led to Riza being DISCHARGED (DNAAed) happens during the the Pn-BN rule, after infamous 'Sheraton Move' - Muhyiddin Mohd. Yassin became Prime Minister on March 2020...
The 'AGREEMENT' was between the Public Prosecutor and the accused persons with regard the CRIMINAL case, and as such, on the face of it, it does not BAR 1MDB from commencing a legal suit against Riza and others...
It should be noted, that RIZA AZIZ and others, seem to have not even made an application to strike out the suit..
That is why it is MOST STRANGE why towards the end of the trial that 1MDB withdraw the suit -hence 'closing the door' to 1MDB to recover the monies entitled - It was a GREAT GIFT for Riza Aziz - and sadly our Finance Minister(also PM) Anwar Ibrahim's has been silent - 1MDB just lost the chance to recover the about RM1.25 Billion plus plus..
Remember, even if Riza Aziz is re-charged for the CRIME - you will be convicted, and sentenced with imprisonment and FINE. 1MDB and Malaysia will not get back the money 'stolen'...Only a CIVIL SUIT would have allowed 1MDB or the government to recover the monies..
Now, 1MDB would not have commenced the civil suit for the recovery of its monies, if it had already received back the money from Riza and Others - so, it did not receive the monies yet on 08 Jun 2021 when the suit was commenced.
IMDB would not have proceeded with the TRIAL if it already received the monies...
If it received back the monies owed, 1MDB will have ended the trial with a CONSENT JUDGMENT, and will not be forced to pay COSTS of
If 1MDB has got an agreement from Riza and others that the money(plus maybe interest) will be paid back, then again it would be a CONSENT JUDGMENT where there will be no order as to COST, which will also safe keep the right to sue if the monies are not returned by a certain date.
It will be foolish to even just get a simple CONSENT Judgment, with will extinguish 1MDB's right to recover all monies owed... if just a simple consent judgment, the ONLY thing that 1MDB has is the ability to go for contempt proceedings, where the penalty may be incarceration and fine - NOT the full amount of monies owing. A fine goes to the Court/Government - not to 1MDB,
To date, there is NO INDICATION that Riza and/or his companies had paid back any of the monies owed - in fact, Riza and the other Defendants are seen to be 'denying the claim', which is CONTRADICTORY to the agreement that led to the DNAA... in the criminal trial.
Why did Finance Minister/Prime Minister Instruct/Order/Consent to the withdrawal of the 1MDB suit against Riza Aziz and others?
Was it to appease Najib/UMNO or BN? Was it to gain the support of UMNO members? We do not care about what Anwar does for his own political future, but when his actions cause Malaysia (and Malaysians) to lose RM Billion plus, is it not time to get rid of a 'foolish' Finance Minister? How many 'bad decisions' does it take for Malaysians to kick out the 'wrong' PM whose actions is preventing us from recovering monies wrongly taken from Malaysia.
ANWAR'S EXPLANATION WHY HE ORDERED/APPROVED 1MDB TO DROP THE IMDB SUIT AGAINST RIZA IS LONG OVERDUE?
1MDB, is a separate legal entity, and is no the Government of Malaysia, and as such 1MDB should have every RIGHT to recover its monies from all those that have wrongly taken its monies.
A criminal 'steals', and some other government 'seizes' the 'dirty money', and maybe returned that money to Malaysia(we do not know yet) - does this mean the Criminal is no longer guilty of the crime, and will not be prosecuted? Note that it is not the alleged criminal personally returning the said 'stolen' monies here, which is still in his possession/control?? Lot of CRITICISM when the Public Prosecutor decided in that 'deal' to DNAAed Riza - But it looks that the RM1 billion plus has yet to be paid by Riza to Malaysia..
And now, Anwar Ibrahim may have caused a loss of RM1 billion plus when 1MDB dropped the legal suit against Riza.
Is it the new law/policy that if a Thief returns the monies/good stolen, he/she will not be convicted for the crime?
Activist Charles Hector demands Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim explain 1MDB’s decision to drop its lawsuit against Riza Aziz and Red Granite, criticising Anwar’s dual role as finance minister.
Charles argues that criminals should not be let off just for returning misappropriated funds and questions whether Riza had repaid the money.
1MDB’s lawsuit, seeking US$248 million from Riza and his companies, was withdrawn without explanation, following talks on a potential global settlement.
Prime Minister cum Finance Minister Anwar Ibrahim must answer for 1MDB’s move to drop its civil suit against Najib Abdul Razak’s stepson Riza Aziz and Red Granite, said activist Charles Hector.
Noting that the Minister of Finance Incorporated owns 1MDB, he demanded Anwar to explain 1MDB’s decision to drop the case and resign his position as finance minister.
“Blame must lie on the finance minister, the prime minister and the cabinet since this is a government-owned company, not simply a government-linked company (where the government) owns part of the shares.
“Anwar may be a ‘most forgiving’ prime minister, and so he can be so for actions done by others that affected him only personally - like he forgives (former inspector-general of police Abdul Rahim Noor) for giving him a ‘black eye’.
“But the crimes of Najib, his wife Rosmah Mansor, his stepson Riza, and Anwar’s now Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi are crimes against the people of Malaysia. So, Anwar, even though a ‘good friend’, should act for Malaysia - and Malaysians have not forgiven yet,” he said in a statement today.
He added that the parliamentary select committees should also investigate 1MDB’s decision to drop its lawsuit against Riza (above).

For the record, Riza and Zahid have been granted a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) for the criminal proceedings against them. In Riza’s case, the DNAA was part of a plea bargain in 2020 that required him to return millions of ringgit.
Najib and Rosmah each have several cases still being litigated in court.
Charles also argued that criminals should not be let off the hook simply because they returned the fruits of their crime. This can only be a mitigating factor for the court to consider imposing a lighter sentence.
He also questioned whether the money allegedly misappropriated by Riza had been returned in the first place.
Riza’s charges
Riza was charged with five counts of money laundering in 2019 for allegedly receiving money misappropriated from 1MDB through the Red Granite’s bank account. Red Granite is a Hollywood production company that he co-founded and produced the films “The Wolf of Wall Street” and “Dumb and Dumber To”.

However, his case was dropped the following year on condition that he return the money. Otherwise, the prosecution reserves the right to prosecute him again.
In 2021, however, 1MDB and its subsidiaries filed another suit in the civil courts against Riza, Red Granite Pictures Incorporated and Red Granite Capital Limited.
They claimed Riza and his two companies purportedly received US$248 million (about RM1.09 billion) in funds that they allegedly misused for personal gain, including by financing film production and buying up various properties.
The suit was withdrawn in open court on Monday without any reason.
The withdrawal came a week after MACC special operations director Zamri Zainul Abidin testified that Riza and his lawyers sent representations to the Attorney-General’s Chambers that they would work towards a global settlement on the recovery of the US$248 million. - Malaysiakini, 26/2/2025
Where Will Malaysians Get Back US$ 248 Million Following 1MDB’s Withdrawal Of Its US$ 248 Million Civil Claim Against Riza Aziz?

Where will Malaysians get back US$ 248 million following 1Malaysia Development Bhd’s (1MDB) withdrawal of its US$ 248 million civil claim against Riza Shahriz Abdul Aziz? In 2021 1MDB had sued Riza Aziz, the stepson of former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak, for alleged misappropriation of US$248 million in funds to finance movie productions and purchase various real estate.
The Malaysian government had claimed that Goldman Sachs had allowed misappropriation and bribes of US$4.5 billion out of the US$6.5 billion in bonds that it raised for 1MDB in 2012 and 2013. In 2020 the Malaysian government and Goldman Sachs had reached a settlement, requiring Goldman Sachs to pay US$2.5 billion while guaranteeing the return of US$1.4 billion of 1MDB assets seized by the authorities around the world, in exchange for Malaysia dropping charges against the bank. To-date Goldman Sachs had not fulfilled its obligations of that settlement.
No reason has been given for the withdrawal of 1MDB’s suit. MACC had previously said that Riza and his lawyers are working towards a global settlement on the recovery of the US$248 million. However no details have been disclosed as to how such a recovery would be conducted. With the settlement with Goldman Sachs currently disputed, public interest requires a full accounting of how Malaysians will get the US$248 million from Riza Aziz.
LIM GUAN ENG
MP For Bagan
DAP National Chairman - DAP, 25/2/2025
Report: Najib's stepson Riza Aziz granted discharge over US$248m money laundering charges after reaching settlement with govt

KUALA LUMPUR, May 14 — Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s stepson Riza Shahriz Abdul Aziz was today released from five counts of money-laundering over US$248 million allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) after he agreed to pay several million ringgit to the Malaysian government, a report has said.
News portal Free Malaysia Today said Sessions Court judge Azman Ahmad today granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) to Riza after an application was made by the prosecution for the order to be made.
Ad-hoc prosecutor Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, who was leading the prosecution, was reported to have read out from a written statement when asking for the DNAA.
“An agreement has been arrived at between the prosecution and the accused under the terms of which the federal government will receive a substantial sum running into several million ringgit,” he was quoted saying by FMT, adding that the sums have a direct reference to the subject matter of the charges in Riza’s case.
Sri Ram said that the prosecution will not be proceeding with the charges against Riza for now pending the completion of the agreement.
“The prosecution, with the consent of the accused, now respectfully moves the court for an order of discharge not amounting to an acquittal,” he was quoted saying.
Sri Ram also reportedly said that appropriate steps would be taken to ensure that Riza receives a full acquittal of the charges if he satisfactorily fulfills the agreement, but noted that the prosecution could still pursue the charges against Riza if he fails to fulfill the agreement.
“But if there is no satisfactory completion of the agreement reached, the prosecution reserves the right to reinstate the charges and to prosecute the accused to the full limit of the law,” Sri Ram also said in the statement.
When seeking for the DNAA order, Sri Ram also noted that Riza made several representations through his lawyers to the authorities, and that the decision to seek for a DNAA was arrived at after careful consideration of the representations and after the agreement was reached.
Riza was previously reported to have sent a representation on November 18, 2019 to the Attorney-General’s Chambers for a review of the charges against him, with his trial yet to have started as a decision on his representation was previously pending.
According to FMT, the Sessions Court today also allowed the RM1 million bail previously posted by Riza’s two bailors to be returned.
On July 5, 2019, Riza — who is also co-founder of the Hollywood production house Red Granite Pictures and son of Najib’s wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor — was charged with five counts of money-laundering under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001 (AMLATFA).
Riza pleaded not guilty and claimed trial to the five charges, which are each punishable with a maximum RM5 million fine or maximum five-year jail term or both.
He was accused of receiving a total of US$248,173,104 (equivalent to about RM1.026 billion by the exchange rate on the day he was charged or over RM1.075 billion by today’s exchange rate) between April 2011 and November 2012.
The funds were alleged to have flowed in cross-border transactions from two Switzerland bank accounts of two companies named in the massive 1MDB financial scandal — Good Star Limited and Aabar Investments PJS Limited — to the US bank account of Red Granite Productions Inc and the Singapore bank account of Red Granite Capital Ltd
The first two sums from Good Star’s RBS Coutts account into Red Granite Productions Inc’s City National Bank account are US$1,173,104 (April 12 to May 12, 2011) and US$9 million (September 10 to October 10, 2012).
The remaining three charges are over the sums of US$133 million (June 18, 2012), US$60 million (October 23, 2012), US$45 million (November 14, 2012), all allegedly transferred from Aabar Investments PJS Limited’s BSI SA account to Red Granite Capital Ltd’s BSI Bank (Singapore) account.
At the time he was charged, the Sessions Court had imposed a RM1 million bail with two bailors, and had also ordered for a travel ban to be imposed on Riza until the conclusion of the case.
What DNAA means
In criminal cases before the court, there are several outcomes possible: such as a conviction and sentencing of an accused; or an acquittal of an accused; or a discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) of an accused which effectively means release from the charges but with the possibility for the accused to face trial for the same charges in the future if the prosecution decides to reinstate charges.
In other words, a DNAA means that an accused has not been acquitted of the charges, but is merely discharged of the charges.
Criminal lawyer Datuk Baljit Singh Sidhu, who was not involved in Riza’s case, cited the Federal Constitution’s Article 145 and the Criminal Procedure Code’s Section 254 when explaining to Malay Mail that the public prosecutor has “wide discretionary powers to discontinue any proceedings at any stage of the trial before judgment”.
Under Section 254 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the public prosecutor or the officer conducting the prosecution may inform the court that he does not propose to continue prosecutions against an accused, which would then result in the accused being discharged of the charges, but with such discharge not amounting to an acquittal unless the court decides so.
As for the effect of a DNAA order, Baljit said: “The order does not prevent the prosecution from charging the accused (Riza) again based on the same facts and the plea of double jeopardy — Article 7 of the Federal Constitution — does not apply.”
Among other things, Article 7 of the Federal Constitution states that a person who has been acquitted or convicted of an offence shall not be tried again for the same offence, except where the conviction or acquittal was quashed and a retrial ordered by a higher court than the court where he was charged or acquitted.
Today’s discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA) of Hollywood movie producer Riza Abdul Aziz is dependent on him fulfilling the terms of the agreement reached with the prosecution to return to the government millions of ringgit allegedly linked to five counts of money laundering.
However, if Riza fails to adhere to the agreement then the prosecution reserves its right to reinstate the charges and prosecute him to the full limit of the law.
This was revealed in a copy of the statement read out by lead DPP Gopal Sri Ram when he informed the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court this morning over the agreement between the accused and the prosecution.
Below is the full statement as read out in court by Sri Ram, who confirmed it when contacted by Malaysiakini after proceedings today.
“Since the filing of the charges against the accused, he has made several representations through his solicitors to the relevant authorities. These representations have been considered most carefully by those concerned and a decision has been arrived at as follows.
“An agreement has been arrived at between the prosecution and the accused under the terms of which the Federal Government will receive a substantial sum running into several million ringgit. The sums have direct reference to the subject matter of the charges framed in this case. The accused has throughout this process received adequate and competent legal representation.
“As a consequence of the agreement arrived at, the charges framed against the accused will not be proceeded with for the present pending the completion of the agreement. The prosecution with the consent of the accused now respectfully moves the court for an order of discharge not amounting to an acquittal.
“If there is satisfactory completion of the agreement then appropriate steps will be taken to ensure that the accused obtains a full acquittal. But if there is no satisfactory completion of the agreement reached, the prosecution reserves its right to reinstate the charges and to prosecute the accused to the full limit of the law.”
On July 5 last year, Riza, who is the stepson of former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak, was charged with five counts of money laundering for allegedly receiving illegal proceeds from sovereign wealth fund 1MDB.
According to the charges read to him before the court, Riza allegedly received a total of US$248 million (RM1.03 billion) on five occasions between 2011 and 2012.
He was accused of committing the offences by receiving the money through the bank account of Red Granite, the Hollywood production company he co-founded. Malaysiakini, 14/5/2020
No comments:
Post a Comment