The prosecution has great responsibility - but sometimes, it may seem that the Public Prosecutor may be following the 'will' of the government of the day, and hence this may tantamount as an abuse of power. AG/PP Gani Patail was prematurely removed. Appandi Ali, was a AG/PP that was appointed by Najib who came out declaring Najib's innocence in the 1MDB case, and of late, there were allegation that current AG/PP may be removed by way of appointment as a Federal Court Judge. Hence, we need to also remove the Prime Minister in choosing the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor of Malaysia.
The Prime Minister inadvertently decides who gets appointed as Attorney General/Public Prosecutor, and the question has always been whether the said Prime Minister is able to influence the Public Prosecutor.
Art 145(1) Federal Constitution says. The Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall, on the advice of the Prime Minister, appoint a person who is qualified to be a judge of the Federal Court to be the Attorney General for the Federation....(3) The Attorney General shall have power, exercisable at his discretion, to institute, conduct or discontinue any proceedings for an offence, other than proceedings before a Syariah court, a native court or a court-martial.
Art 40 Federal Constitution -
(1) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall act in accordance with the advice of the Cabinet or of a Minister acting under the general authority of the Cabinet, except as otherwise provided by this Constitution; but shall be entitled, at his request, to any information concerning the government of the Federation which is available to the Cabinet.
(1A) In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law, where the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is to act in accordance with advice, on advice, or after considering advice, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall accept and act in accordance with such advice.
One needed REFORM is that the Prime Minister's role in appointment of Attorney General/Public Prosecutor must be abolished - the AG/PP should be appointed on the advice of Parliament(or some Parliamentary Committee) or some other Independent Body.
This becomes all the more important since finally in Malaysia former Prime Ministers, maybe even sitting Prime Ministers, Ministers and politicians can now be investigated, charged and prosecuted. This change finally arrived on or about 2018, after General Elections 14. Thereafter, finally law enforcement and prosecution could move and ACT - no one is above the law.
However, after GE15, when Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was appointed - there has been some worry about the post-GE14 reform may suffer, and things may go back to the 'bad' old days. First, there was the pardon of Najib, Then, there was a discontinuation of Zahid Hamidi's case, ...Was there Ministers or 'friends' of the government who were not charged,... it may all be decision of the AG/PP alone, but many will still wonder whether PM had anything to to with it?
The Public Prosecutor holds the power on who is charged and for what charge.
The Public Prosecutor also have the power to at any time DISCONTINUE a criminal case - as happened in the Zahid Hamidi case, after the prosecution had already successfully proved PRIMA FACIE case for all 47 charges that Zahid Hamidi(Anwar Ibrahim's DEPUTY Prime Minister) - which means that if Zahid Hamidi is not able to raise reasonable doubt with regard all of the 47 charges, he would be convicted and sentenced according the law. The discontinuance of the Zahid's case was because the prosecution needed more time the matters raised in Zahid's Letters of Representation - and the Public Prosecutor, after this investigation is complete, can very easily RE-CHARGE Zahid Hamidi and the case can be completed???
The Public Prosecutor can also 'sabotage' the conduct of prosecution, intentionally or negligently. In the cases of Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - there was a failure to call material witnesses
Remember Eric Chia and Kasitah Kadam - both were acquitted because prosecution failed to call material witnesses.The Eric Chia case...In his 30-page oral judgment, he went on to fault the prosecution in every aspect of the case, from the way the main charge and alternative charge were proffered right to the tendering of documents, and its failure to call crucial witnesses.Akhtar said the most glaring setback was the prosecution’s failure to call two material witnesses, who would have been able to confirm whether payment was needed for the technical assistance agreements (TAA) signed between Perwaja Rolling Mill Development and NKK Corporation.He said former Perwaja company secretary R.R. Durai Rajasingam, who was involved in all Perwaja’s contracts, would have known the actual contents of the TAA.“Yet the prosecution never called him. The question is why? I see nothing to say that he would be a hostile witness or give evidence against them.”The judge also questioned the prosecution’s reluctance to call the five Japanese witnesses, including NKK Corporation, Japan, director N. Otani, who was present at the signing of the TAA in Japan in 1993.“I wonder whether it was the Japanese witnesses who were reluctant or the prosecution was the one reluctant to bring them here,” he said.Akhtar also said the prosecution’s contention that the TAA was free fell flat in its face when tendering its documents at the trial as they clearly stated that the agreements would be effective upon receiving first payment.Another document by NKK Corporation not only requested for the payment to be in a lump sum but also stated the amount.Now, see the similarities in the Kasitah Gaddam's case...He said the prosecution failed to lead any evidence to show fabrication of that document, which it contended.- Star, 27/6/2007, Eric Chia acquitted of CBTFormer land and cooperative development minister Tan Sri Kasitah Gaddam was acquitted and discharged by the High Court here of committing corrupt practice and cheating involving shares belonging to the Sabah Land Development Board (SLDB) in 1996.Judge Justice Suraya Othman ruled that the prosecution had failed to establish a prima facie case on both charges for the court to call Kasitah to enter his defence.“The essential ingredients of both the offences of corrupt practice and cheating were not made out on the facts before the court. In the circumstances, the accused stands acquitted and discharged of both the charges against him,” Suraya said in her 74-page judgment.Kasitah, 62, was the first Cabinet member to be charged with such crimes.....,,,,Kasitah had claimed trial to using his position as SLDB chairman for his financial gain by taking part in the decision to approve a proposal to sell 16.8 million shares held by the board in Sapi Plantations Sdn Bhd to Briskmark Enterprise Sdn Bhd, where he was promised 3.36 million shares in Sapi Plantations on Oct 22, 1996.On the second charge, Kasitah was alleged to have cheated the SLDB board members by omitting to disclose the offer by PPB Oil Palms Sdn Bhd to allocate five shares of the company for each share of Sapi Plantations in the proposal by company for listing on the KLSE.He thereby dishonestly induced them to approve the sale of 16.8 million shares held by SLDB in Sapi Plantations to Briskmark Enterprise whereas they would not have approved the sale if they had known about the offer by PPB Oil Palms.Justice Suraya said the failure of the prosecution in not calling six board members who were present in the meeting was detrimental to the case as it had created a big gap over the question of whether the board members were actually cheated by the accused.She also said that evidence by lawyer cum board member Catherine Yong was very damaging as she did not indicate that Kasitah had misused his position or influence her or other board members during the meeting.Besides that, the judge said there was no element of inducement on the part of Kasitah to the board members.- Star, 13/8/2009, Kasitah freed of corruption charges
The Attorney General is the government's lawyer - he also acts for the PM/Ministers and the Government of Malaysia in cases against the government. He also ADVISES the government. He is part of the Pardon Board - and has a significant say.
Hence, the move to SEPARATE the AG and the Public Prosecutor - we wait and hope it happens soon.
D-Day approaches in Najib's 1MDB trial - and we are waiting to see what the court will decide. Did the prosecution manage to prove PRIMA FACIE case for all the charges, or some of the charges? If they did, the Court will order Najib to enter his defence. If not, he will be acquitted...and Prosecution may APPEAL or NOT.
All submissions have been done, and the COURT is making its decision now....and will pronounce his decision on 30/10/2024.
On October 30 (next Wednesday), the High Court will decide if the prosecution has made out its case and which would require Najib to enter defence in the 1MDB trial.At this stage, Najib goes public with an 'APOLOGY" - which was also a claim that he is NOT GUILTY of the charges. This happens on 24/10/2024 - and Najib should have done so, more so when the Court was to decide on this very case on 30/10/2024.
Najib’s son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar Najib, today read out a press statement in which the former finance minister claimed to be innocent and to not have worked together with Malaysian fugitive Low Taek Jho to defraud 1MDB of its money.
“I have already been punished politically but as I am clearly not the mastermind and neither did I collaborate with Jho Low as recent events have shown, I should not be victimised legally too.
“I am still in deep shock knowing now the extent of the wretched and unconscionable shenanigans, and illegal things that happened in 1MDB,” Nizar said at a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur court complex that was streamed live online when reading out the statement on behalf of Najib.
Will the Court cite him for CONTEMPT OF COURT?
Worse still was PRIME MINISTER Anwar Ibrahim's responding to this? He 'welcomed' that apology - and, I am of the opinion that he should have never done this, more so not before the Court renders its judgment before 30/10/2024.
Anwar should have respected the COURT process - and should have not said anything at this point of time.
Does Anwar Ibrahim accept Najib's position that he is NOT GUILTY? Because he was misled, deceived,...by others.
Anwar claims to be 'Father of the Nation' - but is not the King the father of the nation?
Malaysian did no choose Anwar Ibrahim to be the Prime Minister - by any direct vote. He is Prime Minister, simply because the majority of the MPs, i.e. more that 50% of sitting MPs then said that they had confidence then that Anwar Ibrahim be Prime Minister. At any time, Anwar can lose the confidence of the majority - and some one else may become Prime Minister, maybe from PH itself, maybe from some other party.
Anwar, if he wanted to express his PERSONAL opinion, he should have said that it was his 'personal view'? Does his Cabinet support what he did? Does Parliament support his position?
Where is respect for the RULE OF LAW or the administration of criminal justice?
Najib could have included his 'apology' without admission of guilt in the submissions made in court - that is the proper way. He should have stayed silent after submissions were already submitted, and waited for the Court's decision on 30/10/2024?
We WAIT for the Court's Decision on 30/10/2024...
As case ruling looms, ‘sorry’ Najib says already ‘punished politically’ and unfair to hold him legally responsible for 1MDB scandal
KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 24 — Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak today apologised to Malaysians over the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) financial scandal, saying he is deeply shocked and regretful over what had happened at the Finance Ministry-owned company.
Ahead of the High Court’s decision next Wednesday on whether Najib would be acquitted or have to defend himself against 25 charges over 1MDB’s stolen RM2.27 billion funds, Najib said he should not be made a victim or be held legally responsible over 1MDB.
Najib’s son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar Najib, today read out a press statement in which the former finance minister claimed to be innocent and to not have worked together with Malaysian fugitive Low Taek Jho to defraud 1MDB of its money.
“I have already been punished politically but as I am clearly not the mastermind and neither did I collaborate with Jho Low as recent events have shown, I should not be victimised legally too.
“I am still in deep shock knowing now the extent of the wretched and unconscionable shenanigans, and illegal things that happened in 1MDB,” Nizar said at a press conference at the Kuala Lumpur court complex that was streamed live online when reading out the statement on behalf of Najib.
“I deeply regret what has taken place at SRC and 1MDB. However, being held legally responsible for things that I did not initiate or knowingly enable is unfair to me and I hope and pray that the judicial process will, in the end, prove my innocence,” Nizar said on behalf of Najib.
Najib is currently serving his jail term as he was convicted over the misappropriation of former 1MDB subsidiary SRC International Sdn Bhd’s RM42 million, and cannot speak to the public directly as a prisoner.
Earlier in the same statement read out by Nizar, Najib said he had decided to make this statement “after much reflection over the course of 26 months in prison” and after what he described as “significant recent developments” regarding 1MDB.
“First and foremost, it pains me every day to know that the 1MDB debacle happened under my watch as minister of finance and prime minister. For that, I would like to apologise unreservedly to the Malaysian people,” Najib said.
Najib then went on to claim that the recent developments regarding 1MDB allegedly “proves that I am not the mastermind and did not collaborate with Jho Low in deceiving 1MDB of its funds”.
He cited the recent developments as being the recent conviction of PetroSaudi executives in court in Switzerland, as well as a “recent article” by local financial publication The Edge on 1MDB.
While Najib did not specify the date or name of The Edge’s article, he claimed that the publication had concluded that PetroSaudi and Jho Low had worked together to deceive him, and that he was allegedly unaware that PetroSaudi was siphoning 1MDB funds and that he did not knowingly receive any money from funds sent by 1MDB to PetroSaudi.
“As hard as it is for some people to fathom or understand, I was advised and honestly believed at that time that the funds I received were political donations from Saudi Arabia,” Najib said via Nizar.
Throughout the 1MDB trial, Najib’s lawyers had tried to claim that he believed the money which entered his private bank accounts were donations from Saudi Arabia, but the prosecution has said those funds originate from 1MDB and its subsidiaries.
Najib today cited unspecified court proceedings as allegedly showing that the Saudi government did make two “large donations” in 2010, and claimed those were not subject to any criminal proceedings or civil proceedings in court.
Looking back to the past, Najib today said in hindsight that he “should have acted differently” when various parties began to question what was happening at 1MDB.
Najib said he did initiate various investigations on 1MDB, but he was inclined then to believe the explanations by 1MDB’s board of directors and 1MDB’s management.
“And then when I became suspicious about what was actually transpiring at 1MDB, my immediate concerns were its financial predicaments and the risk it posed to diplomatic and bilateral relations at the highest level,” he said, before going on to express his deep shock and deep regret over 1MDB and his hope to be found innocent.
After reading out his father’s statement, Nizar also thanked Najib’s supporters who were present at the press conference.
“I humbly ask that you pray for my father’s court matter on October 30 to be eased, and for my father to be at the side of victory, God willing,” said Nizar, who is also an exco member in the Pahang state government, the Peramu Jaya state assemblyman in Pahang, and Pekan Umno vice-chief.
On October 30 (next Wednesday), the High Court will decide if the prosecution has made out its case and which would require Najib to enter defence in the 1MDB trial.
If required to enter defence, Najib
would have the option of testifying in court in his own defence and
calling in defence witnesses. If the High Court decides that Najib does
not have to enter defence, he would be acquitted and walk free from the
criminal charges in the 1MDB trial. - Malay Mail, 24/10/2024 -
It comes as social media users attack the prime minister for 'welcoming' the jailed leader's apology over the 1MDB scandal.
Anwar Ibrahim has angrily defended his statement welcoming an apology from Najib Razak, saying it is not fair to attack the jailed leader alone over the 1MDB scandal that was at the centre of a Pakatan Harapan (PH) campaign to topple the Barisan Nasional government six years ago.
Anwar said his response to Najib's apology last week - in which the former prime minister stopped short of admitting guilt over the billions of dollars in illegal transfers that triggered one of the biggest corruption scandals in recent years - was done in a responsible manner as the leader of the country.
"I am the prime minister, I am the father of the nation," he said during a speech in Perak yesterday.
"This man said something, what do you want me to do? I said we welcome it.
"Oh, (they become) angry! What's this! What kind of behaviour is this? What kind of people?" said Anwar.
On Oct 24, Najib in a rare apology read out by his eldest son Nizar said he took responsibility for the scandal taking place under his watch as prime minister and finance minister.
Najib, however, maintained his innocence regarding the large-scale money transfers from 1MDB.
"To be held legally responsible for something that I did not initiate or have knowledge of, is unfair to me, and I hope and pray that the judicial process will be in my favour and prove my innocence," his statement said.
It came ahead of a court ruling this week on whether he should defend himself in another case related to 1MDB for money laundering and corruption.
Anwar is under pressure from Najib loyalists, family members and Umno - the party whose support was crucial in helping him realise his ambitions to become prime minister in 2022 - to release the former leader by recommending a full royal pardon, similar to the one granted to Anwar himself in 2018 on the recommendation of then prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
However, Najib, who is serving a 12-year jail term for embezzling RM42 million of SRC International funds, was only granted a partial pardon in the form of a reduction of his sentence from 12 years to six years and his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million.
Many Umno leaders were also angered by the revelation that there was an addendum to the partial pardon in which former Agong, Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, had ordered Najib to serve the reduced sentence under house arrest.
Najib is currently appealing against the High Court's decision in July, which dismissed the claim on the existence of a royal addendum as "hearsay".
Anwar yesterday launched his familiar attack on those who criticised him for welcoming Najib's apology, accusing them of ignoring others who had "stolen billions of ringgit"
"When (they) attack, they are only attacking one person.
"It's not fair to attack (only) one person. The ones who attack have robbed more than that," Anwar said.
Anwar was criticised by, among others, the former chief of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the body at the centre of investigations that led to Najib's conviction and imprisonment in 2022.
Latheefa Koya took the prime minister to task, saying he "has no business and no authority" to make such a comment.
"Since Najib maintains innocence, Anwar’s acceptance condones the crime. It emboldens the corrupt, makes a mockery of the courts, undermines the MACC.
"Is this the prelude to releasing Najib on house arrest?" she asked.
Lawyer Rafique Rashid echoed her sentiments, saying Anwar, as prime minister, should side with the millions of Malaysians who are angry over the 1MDB scandal which has eaten up the state coffers and led to a series of new taxes being imposed on the people.
"Everyone has the right to berate Najib Razak and everyone also has the right to tell the government not to accept the apology.
"How can the prime minister say within 24 hours, 'Yes, we welcome it'? This is very unwise coming from the prime minister," Rafique told MalaysiaNow.
Najib's apology and Anwar's remarks have sparked a flood of comments on social media, especially from PH supporters.
"If his apology is accepted and can be forgiven, we can accept and forgive every convict in the country and release all prisoners," wrote Alfred Adaikalaraj.
"It is nothing more than another brazen attempt to hoodwink Malaysians once again. Shorn of all his self-righteous excuses, he remains unrepentant!" said Ch'ng Kim Hock.
"Your statement shows that you don't have the competence to lead the country to the extent of falling for the scam of an ordinary citizen and foreign firms. I hope you will not make a comeback as prime minister again," said Muhammad Hazim.
DAP leader's sarcasm
Former DAP MP Tony Pua, who together with PKR deputy president Rafizi Ramli were among the most vocal PH leaders to speak out against Najib during the height of the 1MDB scandal, wrote a post full of sarcasm over the former premier's insistence that he was innocent despite his apology.
"I'm not responsible for sacking my deputy PM to cover up 1MDB," said Pua, referring to the dismissal of Muhyiddin Yassin, who had demanded an explanation from Najib shortly after the scandal came to light.
"I'm not responsible for sacking the attorney-general to cover up 1MDB. I'm not responsible for sacking the MACC chief and Special Branch chief to cover up 1MDB. I'm not responsible for installing a stooge as the PAC chairman to cover up 1MDB.
"I'm not responsible for US$27 million 22-carat pink diamond my beautiful wife purchased (and many more millions in jewelry and luxury goods). (Where is it hidden by the way?)" Pua wrote on Facebook, referring to the jewellery that Najib had claimed was a gift from a UAE prince to his wife Rosmah Mansor.
Pua continued:
"I'm not responsible for issuing secret RM3 billion government guarantee letter to raise bonds for 1MDB. I'm not responsible for paying extortionary fees to Goldman Sachs to raise bonds for 1MDB.
"I'm not responsible for negotiating a lopsided super over-priced deals with Chinese companies to cover up 1MDB debts.
"I'm not responsible for going after and persecuting 1MDB whistle-blowers to cover up 1MDB," he said, referring to efforts to thwart the 1MDB investigation.
"I have already paid my political price. Its not fair for me to legally responsible for any of the above. I just have to say I'm sorry for being the stupidest and slowest PM of Malaysia, for trusting the wrong parties who cheated Malaysians of tens of billions of ringgit.
"I should not be sitting in prison, even though I benefited immensely from the 1MDB largesse, in cash and in kind. It's not my fault. Really."
Meanwhile, a portal run by British journalist Claire Rewcastle Brown, who was also actively reporting the 1MDB revelations, criticised Anwar's remarks.
"That is not an apology, it is merely another denial. Anwar ought not
to have accepted it for that reason and nor should the courts who are
supposed to be independent," it said. - Malaysia Now, 28/10/2024
No comments:
Post a Comment