`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


 


Monday, February 1, 2016

Where are the ‘princes of soil’ when Tanah Melayu is plundered?



YOURSAY | ‘The Saudi royal family should issue a statement before their name is dragged through the mud.’
Kim Quek: Attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali is culpable of sabotaging Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) investigation on the RM2.6 billion ‘donation’ due to his following questionable acts:
a) He obstructed MACC from seeking evidence in foreign countries that it said is needed to complete its investigation.
Apandi did so by withholding consent to MACC exercising its rights under the Mutual Legal Assistance Agreements (MLA) to obtain foreign documents on the oxymoronic ground that MACC had already obtained sufficient evidence from the foreign donor to prove conclusively that the money was a “personal donation” to PM Najib Razak. Isn’t that putting the cart before the horse?
Without going through MLA, how could MACC obtain the crucial evidence to complete the probe?
Is it not obvious that Apandi had lied when he said he had conclusive evidence to exonerate Najib when MACC had already declared that the investigation was still ongoing pending AG’s consent on the MLA?
b) Apandi had ordered MACC to close the case, when the latter’s investigation was still in progress. Additionally, Apandi’s order to MACC was illegal as he had no such power.
As such Apandi’s overt, premature and rushed action has only betrayed his overzealousness to close the Najib case at all costs.
Res Ipsa: Well said, former Bar Council chairperson Lim Chee Wee. These are alleged male fide acts by the AG which have been raised time and again.
To clear his name, the AG certainly has to explain why he ordered closure of the investigations on the donation and why he did not allow MACC to complete its investigations overseas by consenting to the MLA.
To set the record straight, the AG does not even have the benefit of looking at the totality of the evidence so how could he ever hold that no crime had been committed. Is it because the donation has been returned?
If that's the case it would certainly amount to a wonderful precedent, Mr AG, as based on the position you have taken, every Tom, Dick and Harry would now be tempted to rob the bank and if they get caught, all they have to do is to return the loot to the bank concerned to avoid being charged.
Is this acceptable by any standards? Perhaps it’s time for the AG to realise that he cannot overstep the powers given to him under the constitution. But will he ever listen?
FairMind: Is Lim the only one from the MACC operations review panel member who has the gumption to question the AG? How about the rest in the MACC panel and in other government institutions who are keeping their silence on the matter?
How is it that many "princes of the soil" in the MACC panels and other government institutions are not vocal about their Tanah Melayu being plundered and misgoverned? Where are Perkasa, PAS and the Malay NGOs?
Negarawan: An excerpt from former Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram's article: In the case of Johnson Tan (1977), Lord President Suffian accepted that the discretion is not as wide as thought to be.
This is what he said: "In deciding that the A-G is not constrained by Article 8 when deciding whether or not to prosecute and if so on what charge, whether a lesser or a greater one, it must not be thought that he may act dishonestly.
“The public of whose interest he is the guardian has a right to expect him to act honestly, without fear of powerful national and local figures or of the consequences to him personally or politically, and without favouring his relatives and friends and supporters, his principal concern being to maintain the rule of law so that there will be no anarchy and to maintain standards in public life and the private sector."
Rick Teo: It’s about time the Saudi royal family come forward to issue a statement before their name is dragged through the mud. There is no way a huge amount such as this could have easily avoided their notice.
Unspin: Since the scandal first broke, I wondered why someone would be so stupid as to have the "donation" deposited into one’s personal bank accounts.
My hypotheses are:
1) He did not trust anyone with the money;
2) He did not control his personal bank accounts. Someone influential in his family managed it and he just went along with it;
3) he had a fetish desire to issue cheques to his supporters in his own name - in line with his ‘I help you, you help me’ motto; and
4) all of the above.
Whatever it was, it was still stupid.
Not Convinced: Also why is someone so stupid as to return RM2.03 billion of the donation? If you don’t need it, at least many poor Malaysians do.
GE14Now!: A noble-hearted person would have made sure that the money was properly lodged and that everything would have been above board.
The only reason Najib is “noble” (as claimed) is that he was found out. If all of these things happened so long ago, then surely he could have come out with all the required evidence and documents to prove that he was noble and that all was accounted for.
He could have gone to the Nothing2Hide forum and produced all the evidence that would have shut all of us, me included, up.
By the way, what's so noble about taking money from SRC’s RM42 million? -Mkini

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.