Monday, February 15, 2016

Possibilities not thought of

While visiting a friend's wife at a hospital yesterday, we got diverted into talking about current affairs.

Our friend is in the transportation industry and very perceptive. He used to be in government and now in public sector after his company got corporatised and listed on the Bursa. He was in the centre of public attention recently.

He commented, "People only tahu complain, assume and tuduh. They don't really know what they are talking. Banyak suka cakap berdasarkan hanya andaian without knowing enough."

He was refering to Dato Marina Mahathir who commented without knowing head or tail about his company's recent action. We agreed. Had long realised Marina is poor on facts and details but lots of rhetorics.

We said, "At times, public forget that they could only see what they can and be made to see. Many happenings behind the scene are not known to them."

Our friend said, "To be fair, they cannot comment what they cannot see or comprehend. However, they cannot be quick to presume. There maybe other considerations and possibilities. There could be more to it."

It leads us to RPK's recent posting which reminded us of a commentator, X Mrsm somban 70s claiming to be our ex-schoolmate. He was trying to lead the comments by making assumptions but guised as unanswered questions.

It was a common issue but not many knows what was really happening. If he is asking question, why assume cover-up before an answer is given. It is sheer psycho babble.

The commentator cannot be our ex-schoolmate.

Our friends would not write this way: "I believe YOU as a former student of top mrsm college and later went to study oversea will help us to answer this non rocket sceince laymen question with a straight forward answer."  

Pariah mana nak menyamar ...

Charge sheet before investigation

RPK mentioned something this blog had written. How could WSJ and SR leaked a charge sheet when the investigation is still going on and specific law to charge was not ascertain yet?

In his posting, The day Gani patail dug his own grave, RPK put that information into a proper perspective and with a timeline. Excerpt below:
On 10th May 2015, Najib announced in Sabah that he is not going to bow to any pressure to resign.

“I only bow down to party members and the people. As long as the party members support me, and as long as people give their trust, I shall continue to serve,” Najib said to a 40,000-strong crowd in Kota Belud, Sabah.

“Obviously one voice (Dr Mahathir) cannot be greater than the voices heard from the crowd here, in Kota Belud and the mandate given by the people. Was he (Dr Mahathir) not tested? There was the test of Team A and Team B, (where Dr Mahathir) almost lost. More than 50% of Umno members back then demanded for his resignation. What was his reply? ‘Even if I win by a single vote, I will continue to be the prime minister.’ A great answer.”

That was Najib’s counter-shot, which, in short, was Najib’s declaration of war and his pledge to not surrender and that he is taking no prisoners. ‘No quarters asked and none given’ would be more or less how the military strategists would put it.

The following day, on 11th May 2015, during Umno’s anniversary celebration, Najib fired his second shot to demonstrate that it is going to be an all-out war with no prisoners taken and a fight to the last man.

“Outside, there are all sorts of stories, all sorts of things being made up by those who want to split us up, those who want to sow doubt among us, those who want to poison our minds – they do not love Umno.”

In short, Najib just called the ANC traitors to the party.

To make sure that the battle-line is very clear and that there is no confusion regarding friend and foe, two days later, on 13th May 2015, during the Cabinet meeting, Najib practically told the entire Cabinet to speak out now or forever hold your peace.
In other words, Najib pointed to the door and told all those who are not with him that they can walk out the door and never come back.

No one did and even Deputy Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin kept his head down and would not look Najib in the eye. Politically, Najib had won the day.
Over just three days — between 10th May and 13th May — Najib took on his adversaries and the ANC and dared them to come out and fight. But no one dared because they knew that they could not take Najib on politically and win: giving new meaning to Sun Tzu’s Art of War about knowing your enemy.

They just did not know Najib as they thought they did and in just three days Najib demolished the entire conspiracy. And that was when I suddenly become so awed by this man who I, too, once opposed.

Anyone who can demolish an entire army that had surrounded him and had their knives at his throat in just three days deserves my support. Even the great ‘political guru’ Dr Mahathir could not do that. He had to first kill Umno to kill his enemies.

Realising that Najib was actually quite an astute politician after all, contrary to what they had originally thought, and that Najib was strengthening his political defences pretty well, which they had never expected, they decided to try to bring down Najib another way. Basically they will try to use the legal channel instead of the political route.

The following day, on 14th May 2015, Gani Patail told MACC’s Deputy Director of Investigation, Dato’ Sazali Salbi, to draft a charge sheet against Najib. You can read about that episode in the article Najib was supposed to resign on 29 July 2015 (READ HERE).

And the 14th of May 2015, the day that the ANC thought they had successfully placed Najib is his coffin and only needed a few nails to hammer it shut, was the beginning of the 74-day countdown towards the day when Gani was going to be slaughtered instead on 27th July 2015.

On 2nd July 2015, at 4.42pm EST to be exact, the Wall Street Journal published a report regarding 1MDB, which the ANC had fed them. Sarawak Report was then told to pick it up and keep harping on the matter, if possible every single day until Najib falls. They were also promised that more ‘secrets’ would be provided as they go along.

Then, in that same month of July 2015, they formed a Task Force to investigate the affairs of 1MDB based on the revelation by the Wall Street Journal and Sarawak Report, information that had come from them in the first place.

The irony of this whole thing is: the expose by the Wall Street Journal was made on 2nd July 2015, followed by the expose by Sarawak Report after that. The Task Force to investigate 1MDB was formed only after that and in July 2015. However, the charge sheet was drafted much earlier on 14th May 2015.

It was clear from this sequence of events and from the timeline that the charge sheet was a Red Herring (cannot call it fake because it exists, although it merely existed as a ‘prop’ to use against Najib to force him to resign). And it was clear that Gani was playing around with the charge sheet and that he did not really have a case.

Normally a charge sheet is prepared after the investigation has been completed and after it has been established that a case does exist. Any first-year law student can tell you that. Nowhere in the world do you prepare a charge sheet first and then launch an investigation (and based on a newspaper report on top of that) and then ‘tailor’ the investigation to fit in to the charge sheet.

So, you have decided that a crime has been committed, and you have decided what the nature of that crime is, and you have already prepared the charge sheet, and now you have to launch an investigation and ‘guide’ that investigation to make everything fit in nicely.

Is this what is called putting the cart before the horse?

And then, soon after that, on 27th July 2015, His Majesty the Agong, who could no longer tolerate all these shenanigans, signed the letter terminating the services of Gani Patail. Anyway, Gani was not well enough to work, unless he could buy a new kidney, so better he just rest than stress himself out and end up in an early grave.

And, two days after that, on 29th July 2015, Muhyiddin Yassin followed Gani into retirement.

And, another two days after that, on 1st August 2015, the MACC deputy public prosecutor, Ahmad Sazilee Abdul Khairy, was arrested and the following day, 2nd August 2015, his office was raided where they found the draft copy of that charge sheet.

On the following day, 3rd August 2015, the MACC Chief Commissioner, Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, announced that the RM2.6 billion was actually a donation after all and was not stolen from 1MDB.

On the following day, 4th August 2015, MACC made a police report saying that the charge sheet is a fake. In a way it was a fake because it was a ‘stand-alone’ charge sheet that was not related to any crime. In other words, the charge sheet was drafted before an investigation was launched and before it could be determined whether any crime had been committed.

Finally, in December 2015, after completing the investigation, MACC sent its report to the Attorney General, exactly seven months after Gani Patail told Sazali to draft the charge sheet.

Now tell me, after that thesis I just did above, can any sane lawyer tell me that I am not better than even those so-called qualified lawyers?

Let any lawyer tell me that drafting a charge sheet seven months before the completion of the investigation and even before it can be established that a crime has been committed is standard practice and is being done by every country all over the world.

By the look of it, there is the possibility that Gani may have intended to set-up Najib. He has been known to fix people up. Remember the poor first sodomy case against Anwar Ibrahim?

Have those presumptous commentators though of this possibility?

And then there were three ...

Taking a cue from Tun Mahathir that AG Tan Sri Apandi Ali will not make a case against Najib, all sort of accusations are made against AG when the event turned out to be so.

The line AG is covering up is easily digestible and meet the unschooled imposter's shallow criteria to "answer this non rocket sceince laymen question with a straight forward answer". It is a line to deceive people who refuse to think and uninterested to find out the truth or at least, find out more.

We were just tipped off this information. After receiving the papers from MACC, AG was on medical; not sure what it is, whether he went for a medical procedure or was unwell. The studying of the Investigation Paper (IP) was made by his team.

He came back and was briefed by their finding. It is the team that made the coloured flowchart that AG  put up during PC. Basically, the decision was a group decision. The man at the top usually gets the blame. Not saying AG was negligent but it is not merely his own decision. 

And here is something curious.

The first time MACC gave AG their IP, they gave two recommendations believe to be related to SRC. Deputy Commissioner, Dato Shukri gave a statement that the investigation on RM2.6 billion is incomplete.

Earlier, Commissioner Tan Sri Abu Kassim said the RM2.6 billion was a donation. Him and another top official met the representative of the donor and saw the document before he went for operations. It was publicly made known much earlier that 1MDB is not the scope of investigation of MACC but that of Bank Negara.

The uproar for the first rejection of the IP by AG was expected. Naturally, pressure was applied on AG by the critics and detractors. Attention seeking Khairuddin made reports with police and MACC. He also filed a judicial review in which AG filed objection.

Former AG, Tan Sri Abu Talib also made statement and RPK dealt with him accordingly. Dato Mukhriz made the Anwar-esque request for Majlis Raja-Raja to investigate. Among them applying public pressure are several members of the review panel that had access to the IP before it was submitted to AG. And one may have leaked the info to Tony Pua.

As pointed out in this blog, SRC is expected to be the Archilles heels of Najib but as pointed out also, the evidence is not easy to put forward in court. It has a long money trail that requires piles of evidence or busloads of witnesses. Several key people in SRC disappeared.

It could stumble somewhere along the way in court. One can expect for AG to want more evidence and information. The reason for AG action is so simple that Dato Ahmad Badshah and any SPM dropout can understand.

AG need to have a 99% chance in criminal prosecution first before taking it to court. [Read TMI report here]

Within a wisk of time, MACC resubmitted the IP and publicly announced they made three recommendations. Mkini reported the three charges are under Penal Code. It will be interesting as it is said to have come an already drafted charge sheets?

When Bank Negara could not provide additional evidences as requested by AG, the case was practically closed. Did MACC provide additional evidences as requested within that short time?

As far as the three recommendations, the two recommendations could be the same SRC recommendations, but what is the third one? 1MDB or RM2.6 billion also?

The commentators on the Internet and social media are presuming Najib is personally being charged on the three counts. Maybe someone leaked it to the public or they are just presuming. It is contrary to other statements made, but why only Najib? Aren't there others supposed to be charged together?

We were informed that MACC will drag all the members of it's five committees to meet AG to ask for explanation. That is tantamount to putting AG up for the firing squad.

Come to think of it, maybe the information is not right. MACC has stated that they are professional enough and will not encroach into AG's power to prosecute provided for under the constitution. It is Abu Kassim himself who acknowledged it. He said he will respect the AG's decision.

It could be the figment of imagination of certain segment of the public for absolute transparency. How could AG make a case in court if his case materials are open to public scrutiny and details out in the open? His strategy and tactic will be known already. Najib will surely get away scot free.

Having involved in the fight to topple Pak Lah, it is likely that the same will happen. It is not about actually getting a guilty sentence on Najib but only to charge him so that he vacate the PM post for someone of their choice to fill it up.

Muhyiddin ... maybe? Ku Li ... maybe but too old already? Zahid ... who knows since Matthias Chang already asking him to get to their side. It is the answer Tun M has refused to answer or does not have the answer.

Still wondering how Tun M could deliver his cue so perfectly timed.


Anonymous said...

All bollocks aside, with reference to Section 3 (S.3), Section 50 (S.50) and Section 16 (S.16) MACC acts, please answer the following question:

Is Najib Razak guilty of receiving RM2.6 billion donation into his personal account?

a. Guilty
b. Not guilty

The question does not need any further mumbo-jumbo or bollocks, just straight answer of a or b.

Anonymous said...


saya mengaku saya d kalangan orang yang support pegerakan tun...satu je tolong bagi saya faham...macam mana anda terima 2.6 bilion masuk dalam akaun peribadi pm sedangkan kita ada akta yang tidak bagi penjawat awam terima sumbangan hatta secara peribadi...kita jangan usik dulu kenapa ag pilihan ini tidak melakukan sesuatu kepada najib...itu hal dia..tapi anda...macam mana anda boleh terima semua ini...dan mempertahankan najib...adakah anda setuju 2.6 bilion masuk akaun pm...sumbangan peribadi atau rasuaha atau dana politik atau menentang keganasan tolak tepi dahlulu...

satu lagi..bagaimana anda boleh terima 42 juta masuk dalam akaun dia...n dalam hujahan mahkamah najib mengaku perkara tersebut..apa stand saudara...berlainan pendapat perkara biasa...cuma tolong fahamkan orang benak macam saya ni yang tak boleh terima dua2 ni...tolong ye....


Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...

AG operate based on CPC. If the criteria checklist is met, chances of conviction for criminal cases is 90 - 99%.

MACC operate purely based on MACC Act. That is where they think they are right but when in court, they usually lose.

Yet they get angry with AG for rejecting their IP.

If it is true MACC is not charging based on MACC Act but on penal code, it means they are going on minor technicalities in the same manner MACC and Gani Patail charged and sent Khir Toyo to the slammer.

Ini kerja zalim.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
A Voice said...


You are recycling comments from your facebook and not reading this posting. Surprise you have stooped low to trolling.


save that insult intended comment elsewhere


public debate or discourse have advance beyond those issues. Maybe you should research answers at your own time from past postings.

Malaih nak repeat. Berita pukul 8 pun sudah tidak ada replay.


You have to find your own answers and form your opinion. Others cannot answer for you. It is a widely discuss issue.

If you are fair minded, you raise all relevent questions and look for right answers.

Practising lawyer said...


The law is not as simple as yes or no. This or that. Understand that first.

You are playing a cheap debate laced with quoted sections of the law.

bedbags said...

no bro. when someone asks you a question, and a simple one at that, you dont retort like you're going through pre=puberty.

so what is the use of the law if when it is clear as day, you dont follow it?

its pretty obvious that the stance today is "laws are made to be broken". so many bullshits bro. im surprised that you answered that way.

simply saying that "..have advance beyond those issues" shows how disconnect you are. you can repeat the same thing and pretend that you are on the next station, but shouldnt the issues raised here be a sort of gauge?

clearly people have not moved on. wanna know why? cause the rules were clear. if the premier wants to play by his OWN rule, maybe he should play another game?

A Voice said...

Fair issue raised, bedbag.

However, we disagree it is a pre-puberty response. In fact it is a mature and adult response. All the issue raised have been written before and with all the links, so do go back to read. Hate to rewind.

A mature reading adult would stick to the subject of this posting and that is whatever presumption made usually left out possibilities. By answering all those issues, it would divert from the message. So best not answer.

Appreciate commentators just state your point and that is it. All questions usually have pre-empted answers and replies. Lets not waste time.

Then other commentators can response or propose other views. THese questioning game is all accusation. Nothing more. So state your accusation clearly.

Anonymous said...

Your statement that the questioning game is all accusation has an uncanny resemblance of previous humorous answers given by the receiver himself and other politicians. It is still an issue which lingers on among rational thinking minds. It is no longer an accusation when the AG himself has verified that the money was indeed transferred into the receiver's personal account, and claimed that part of it had been returned. No proof is required to show how the money was spent or how it was returned. As long as no logical answer is given, no rational thinking mind would ever believe it.
Maybe it is something like what the former judge said that the AG can't nor will press the charges because he is being appointed by Agong under the advice of the receiver. The moment he want to press the charge, he will be replaced.

Anonymous said...

To Practising lawyer:
Don't you think the case could be referred to as a precedent in the future? Let's say that I am the Chief Police Commissioner of Kuala Lumpur, and at the same time I am the chairman of Yayasan Anak Yatim Malaysia with 100,000 registered orphans. Let's also say that the same Saudi prince deposits into my personal account some RM10 million which I later withdraw the money and close my account. And let's also say that I have indeed returned RM5 million to that prince. After being tipped off, and press-charged with misappropriation because me as a public officer and suddenly my personal bank account has grown fat with that RM10 million , couldn't I quote the current case as a precedent, claiming that I have returned the money and spent the rest giving each orphan RM50? No?

A Voice said...


Maybe you should know a bit more of the former judge.

You wrote: " logical answer is given, no rational thinking mind would ever believe it." I believe you are best to speak for yourself and the few and limited people who share your view. But not to represent some mass grouping of people.

It brings us to the subsequent interesting issue.

What is truth? Who determine it other than god and the final determination of truth by God is only in the afterlife?

By using System? Public opinion? Perception???

7:10 PM

You senario not complete. A certain source with link to the issue in hand said MACC did not give right money trail.

We wonder how will AG win in court with faulty money trail?

Anonymous said...

Your source was on the money

My Say