Wednesday, July 19, 2017

Injustice and unravelling of Department of Justice

Last week's reported incident of UK police giving notice to Raja Petra to refrain from writing about Sarawak Report's Clare Rewcastle Brown will not deter him from writing more about her.

In a country that practises and respect free press that Dato Najib faced barriers to undertake defamation lawsuit against her, the action she had taken to make a police report is unbecoming of western journalist that subscribe to the mantra of free speech and freedom of the press.

She herself is no less a writer of facts intertwined with fiction.

Her action indicate a sense of desperation no less than Tun Dr Mahathir's attempt to politicise the RCI on forex loss as a political attack against him.

As soon as the civil forfeiture suit made by Department of Justice, it is widely believed that the pink diamond story concocted to implicate Datin Seri Rosmah was a giveaway.

Not only it had a local political flavour, it revealed something to those in the know and gave lead to the appropriate line of action to be undertaken.

The social media did not held back and openly revealed that the first DOJ Kleptocrasy is a fake charge meant to tarnish Dato Najib but could not technically proceed for lack of evidence.

Typical similarity in US TV crime drama to charge first and investigate later. In this KARI case, it will be forgotten after Mahathir successfully toppled Najib.

A similar modus operandi at work with the FBI revelation on Hillary Clinton emails at the last moment that could not be debunked and led to her lost.

It is further claimed that it was Clare who concocted the story and it was done in concurrence with former US AG, Loretta Lynch and former FBI Director James Comey.

A source alleged that the Malaysian side of the politically motivated fiction writing alleged Mahathir as financier to this international conspiracy and involves Tan Sri Sanusi Junid, Matthias Chang and few others.

The first time Sanusi's name surfaced.

The complainant could only be Dato Khairuddin Abu Hassan but apparently he merely lent his name and hardly set foot in Washington in the material time.

As revealed in Malaysia Today, YTL paid for the international PR to coordinate the new dissemination through reknown foreign media.

Clare's central role has to do with her own insidious agenda against her place of birth in Sarawak and her link to Tony Blair and George Soros.

True or false, the widely quoted SR by foreign media and close similarity between SR story and the two DOJ submissions fueled suspicion of a conspiracy.

Though not at liberty to reveal what was uncovered in the many weeks this blog was not regularly updated, one thing that can be concluded is SR and DOJ stories had deviated from the truth.

The ill-informed Malaysian public fell to opposition propoganda with it's simplistic message to a complex web of financial and investment transactions involving off-shore banking.

Devoid of information, the Malaysian public could not distinguish between allegation and imagination versus truth based on facts and evidence.

It is purely a one sided assessment if there had been any.

Those in the know are well aware that certain stories were conveniently spin to create untrue perceptions of wrongdoings by Najib or his wife that was then widely disseminated.

The alleged wrongdoings, as concocted by Clare using selective leaked and incomplete documents itself, occured off shore, beyond the scope of 1MDB control and remains as allegation unproven in court.

The truth should hopefully be revealed soon.

Mahathir and the co-conspirator he met during Hari Raya in London for his grandchildren that could not return may have sensed it.

Coincidently, NST published a letter by a Jason Leong which is a prequel to what could be coming up:
The injustice of U.S. Dept of Justice

RECENTLY, the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) announced the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of about US$540 million (RM2.3 billion) in assets obtained with money allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

By JASON LEONG - July 18, 2017 @ 12:50pm

RECENTLY, the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) announced the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of about US$540 million (RM2.3 billion) in assets obtained with money allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).

This was in addition to the US$4 billion civil forfeiture proceedings filed last year.

What is missing from these proceedings is the criminal charge or charges against the perpetrator or perpetrators of the alleged crimes.

The comments made here are not about the facts of the case related to the civil forfeiture proceedings by DoJ against assets obtained with funds allegedly misappropriated from 1MDB, but rather, the focus here is on the injustice created by civil forfeiture laws, which is perpetrated by DoJ.

These civil forfeiture proceedings contravene basic criminal law that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt: the presumption of innocence.

In reality, this law carries the presumption of guilt until proven innocent.

It is exactly the opposite of how most modern justice system should work: your possessions are presumed guilty and you have to prove innocence.

Civil forfeiture rests on the idea that the property itself, not the owner, has violated the law.

It is based on a legal fiction that the property itself is guilty of a crime.

Under this fiction, a proceeding is brought in rem, or against the property itself, instead of in personam, or against the owner.

Since it is based on a legal fiction, its resultant consequences become ridiculous in that property can be guilty of a crime and thereby forfeited to the state regardless of whether any individual person is ever arrested, charged with, and much less convicted of, a crime related to that property.

It goes against legal logic and rational principles of jurisprudence because things or property cannot think, act or harbour criminal intention.

As the accused is an item of property, not a person, the property owner has no right to legal counsel and becomes a third-party claimant.

If owners cannot afford the legal costs to plead that their property is innocent, too bad.

The US law on civil forfeiture threatens and violates the most common constitutional rights afforded to citizens in most democratic countries with a constitution.

It allows DoJ to take a person’s home, properties, business, car, cash or other assets on the mere suspicion that it is connected to criminal activity, and without ever arresting, charging or even convicting that person with a crime. Such a law is repugnant in most civilised societies and it is shocking that such a law exists in the US, a country that is supposed to recognise and hold dear rights to private property and due process of law.

US federal laws also allow forfeiture revenue to go into a newly created fund called Assets Forfeiture Fund, controlled by federal law enforcement.

As a result, federal forfeiture revenue can go back to the very agencies charged with enforcing the law, giving them a financial stake in forfeiture efforts.

State and local agencies can also participate in forfeiture with the feds and receive a cut of the revenue through the benign-sounding equitable-sharing programme.

Under this self-funding mechanism, the US government’s use of forfeiture has grown exponentially.

This practice of giving law enforcement agencies a financial stake in forfeitures by awarding them some, if not all, of the proceeds is legally and morally wrong.

Such financial incentive creates a conflict of interest resulting in the violation of basic due-process requirement of impartiality, which is the rule against bias.

Impartiality in the administration of justice is a bedrock principle of any good legal system.

No one should lose property without being convicted of a crime and law enforcement agencies should not profit from taking people’s property without ever proving a crime has been committed.

This is a fundamental principle and therein lies the injustice perpetrated by DoJ against 1MDB and its related parties.

Kuala Lumpur
Detractors attacked the comments made from the government side against DOJ's civil forfeiture. Logical arguments by Ministers are ridiculed and jeered as stupid.

Will they be able to continue to attack any fair comment and opinion with shallow politically motivated replies?

It is indeed crucial to them because the PPBM psychological warfare strategy is to make the Melayu so fed-up that they refuse to hear explanation and think rationally.

The strategy Sanusi Junid been talking all these years is to make "Melayu meluat". It could lead to the "amuk" psychological phenomenon found among Malays.

Dunno what the keling call it.

Malaysian AG, Tan Sri Apandi Ali made a statement that was headlined as he fears no one, not even Mahathir [read Malaysiakini here].

However, ignoring and ridiculing it will be at their own peril. Apandi is unafraid of Mahathir because he has confidence in the investigation papers at his disposal.

Not even Audit Department that presented their finding to PAC is sufficiently thorough.

There is nothing to fear of Mahathir because the old man is an outright liar.

As mentioned before in this blog, one Mahathir confidante said that the facts doesn't matter, only the principle matter.

Yes it is principle alright.

The principle of lies coming from an outright liar that have U turned on his every words, belief, positions, and also principles throughout his whole life!

All out of hatred, pursuit of power, craze for control and need to hide the skeleton in his closet of the pasts.

No comments:

My Say