Wednesday, July 11, 2012

Debunking Scorpene Scandal Part IV: Dramatising the Court

Le Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris
The propaganda strategy by those conspiring to pin Najib with the alleged Scorpene scandal issue were using several prong attack.

It begins with Dr Kua Kia Soong questioning military spending and strangely the military untrained socialist could question the submarine as overpriced and by that acute logic, claim the existense of bribery and kickback.

The propaganda's media strategy used Hong Kong-based Asia Sentinel as leading newsbreaker, which in turn is expanded and sustained further by major pro-opposition news portal and opposition politicians, to be propagated by pro-opposition social media.

Altantuya’s murder is not within the jurisdiction of the French court, but they kept playing it for sensational and emotional impact and news worthiness. It serves as a decoy because the French Investigating Court will not have any charge to pin on anyone, French or non.

Asia Sentinel could only spin as they begin by touching on DCNS’s other allegations of corruption in arms purchases by other countries. As general election draws near in 2012, more news emanated from Asia Sentinel. SUARAM and PKR played up the issue with more lies and deception.

Initially, it was to dramatise the court process to get public attention, lie if necessary.


In SUARAM’s website dated February 9th, 2011  [read here], they reported the following:
In April 2010, the lawyers representing SUARAM, informed us that the courts had accepted the request to investigate the claim of corruption for a payment amounting to Euro 114 million made as commissions from DCNS to Perimekar. At this stage the investigations are still ongoing, and it may take a few more months, for the findings to be made known, and for the investigators to announce a decision as to whether there is sufficient evidence to pursue a full trial at the next level of the courts.
That was said on February 9th 2011 that it takes few months for the findings to be known. By July 19, 2011 issue entitled, “Malaysia's Sub Scandal Resurfaces”, Asia Sentinel start to play-up the following:
It is likely that in September we should have access to the first police conclusions from all the investigations that have taken place over the last 18 months; Paris-based lawyer William Bourdon told Asia Sentinel Tuesday. 
We know that the police seem to have obtained quite crucial documents and Bourdon, the leader of a team of lawyers investigating the case, is to visit Kuala Lumpur on July 20 to confer with Suaram, the NGO that has filed a complaint with French authorities over the scandal. The question in France is whether under French law an NGO can act as a complainant. That will be decided in coming days by a French judge, Bourdon said. He added that he is confident that he will succeed.
Didn’t they say the court accepted their application in April 2010, 15 months before that? Thus, why was Asia Sentinel asking "whether under French law an NGO can act as a complainant"?

Something smells of a lie! And, aren’t they being dramatic?


In the October 4th 2011 issue entitled, “Noose Tightens in French Defense Scandal”, Asia Sentinel wrote:
Allegations involving DCNS, formerly known as DCN, range from murder to bribery and corruption and go from defense procurement officials in each of those countries to some of the top politicians in France. 
Under the French legal system, prosecutors under the control of the Ministry of Justice must make a preliminary enquiry, during which no one has access to the files, so that any information the police have obtained cannot be shared. The prosecutors have been stymied for years by the ministry. However, investigators appear to be losing their awe of politicians all the way up to President Nicholas Sarkozy.
That is a bit of Hollywood when considering that the documents were all leaked by Asia Sentinel on June 25th 2012.

MyKMU call their claim as a joke since political observers are aware of Asia Sentinel’s strong link with Anwar Ibrahim and PKR. [read here]

In his blog posting, "Scorpene Scoop" [read here], Freddie Kevin picked the following from Brittanica, below:
The juge d’instruction handles a case only if ordered to do so by the procureur (public prosecutor) or when requested to do so by a private citizen. Once the juge d’instruction’s investigation has begun, the accused must be supplied with counsel, who must be given access to all documents and evidence.
He commented: “So what is so sensational about that, the Malaysian government would also be privy, and can safely say an "Independent commission on Scorpene unnecessary".”

Strangely in their March 8, 2012 issue entitled “Investigating Judges Named in Malaysia Submarine Graft Case”, Asia Sentinel begin to report on Perimekar’s contract. 

Basically they sighted the documents but pretended not to so as to build up their propaganda first. 

It is also obvious that they only begin to understand what they were accusing Razak and the Government of. They will do some spin to keep their story consistent.

As much as they wish to make the public believe that the Scorpene corruption is real as Malaysia Chronicle puts it here, they had no choice because the public demands to see proof. Many issues raised on SUARAM placed them under pressure. [Read The Mole here, here, here and here

In the The Mole here particularly, Cynthia Gabriel sounded rattled and defensive. She said they were constrained by French law to disclose proof. 

No one asked them to reveal the document. Like we said earlier, they themselves did not know of the issues in their allegations. 

Can someone please make a complain to the French court on the breach of confidentiality by SUARAM and their lawyers?

Judge or Prosecutor?  

The best part to all the hoopla by SUARAM is that the court have yet to appoint the Investigating Judges. 

In the same issue, Asia Sentinel pretended they were not insulting the readers by ignoring what was hyped earlier and wrote that the past few years since April 2010, the police was investigating and gathering information:
In accordance with the French legal system, the Malaysia case has first been the subject of a preliminary survey from the financial division of the legal police. So the appointment of the two investigating judges, Serge Tournaire and Roger Le Loire, follows more than two years of investigation. The two are known for previous investigations on national and international corruption matters. They have broader powers to investigate independently and can call witnesses and conduct international surveys.
Was there a judge that accepted their application as they claimed on April 2010? It sounds as though SUARAM is winning when the court accepted their application, isn't it?

Could it be only the prosecutor that directed police to commence investigation?

Isy isy isy ... another SUARAM lie?


Nevertheless, whether there is a case or not, it would depend on the judges’ analysis and not police comments.

As public pressure was building up against SUARAM, they got bolder in their May 29th 2012 issue before the Bangkok press conference on May 30th to make spin a story that Dato Najib will be indicated:
There appears to be a growing possibility that Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak could be indicted in France for complicity in the case. Central to the inquiry is alleged illegal commissions that were paid out to Malaysian officials and politicians, which have been deemed illegal and categorized as bribes, after France became a signatory to the OECD convention.
It was to make their future story believable in case Malaysia is not cooperating with investigation.

In the meanwhile in Malaysia, they spinned it as Dato Najib will be sub-poenaed as per their subpeona list. Free Malaysia Today here reported SUARAM young lawyer, Fadiah Nadwa Fikri giving Dato Najib a stern warning.

Did anyone ponder as to whether there was a trial going on to sub-poena anyone? It is an insult to anyone’s intelligence to be lied outrightly by SUARAM and PKR.

Their lie was blown apart (but not by a C4) when they announced during a fund raising dinner that one Jasbir Singh Chahl will be sub-poena but till today, he or the police or French Embassy have yet to receive any instruction to deliver a sub-poena.

Tian Chua's Malaysia Chronicle confidently spinned it here as Razak Baginda's right hand man agree to cooperate.

When it was exposed by The Mole here that the French Embassy had know knowledge, Cynthia was shaken and Tian Chua tried desperately to defend Cynthia Gabriel in Malaysia Chronicles here but it was in vain.

So, anyone else to be sub-poenaed? Sure ...


Further on the court procedure, Asia Sentinel's October 4th issue also wrote below:
In April 2010, the lawyers, acting for Suaram filed a 'plainte avec constitution de partie civile' complaint, which is a criminal prosecution with a concurrent independent action for civil damages. That would mean there would be two trials, one a criminal trial and the second a civil trial for compensation. 
This has two great advantages, Breham said. First, an independent instruction judge is appointed for the civil case. Second, Suaram becomes a party to the case, at which point the legal team, acting for Suaram, can then have access to all the files about the case and can ask questions of the instruction judge and request that he investigates on its behalf. 
There is a huge struggle in France between the prosecution and the instruction judge. Breham says that unlike a prosecutor, this independent judge has investigative powers to subpoena officials from DCN, and access documents in the DCN offices to obtain evidence of commissions. The judge can also request "mutual criminal assistance" from the Malaysian authorities for purposes of information and cooperation. So far, there is no indication that Malaysian officials intend to cooperate.
That is too far ahead and most unlikely to reach that stage.

According to Freddie Kevin in his posting, "Scorpene Tales" [read here], he quoted from a source, "Judiciary in France", below:
The French judicial system includes specialist judges, known as juges d’instruction (investigating judges), who oversee investigations into the more serious and complex offences. The process is known as the information judiciaire (judicial investigation).  
Cases are referred to the juge d’instruction by the public prosecutor or by a victim who wishes to bring a civil claim for damages within criminal proceedings." 
And, from Law Commission of New Zealand on "French Criminal Procedure", he quoted a more elaborate procedure:
Upon becoming aware of an offence, the police are required to notify the procureur, although in practice they do not always do so. The victim might, however, take the matter to a juge d’instruction in the event of the police or the procureur not proceeding to investigate. 
That only confirmed SUARAM lied on the true court procedures.
Once the procureur is notified of an offence, he or she is responsible for directing the activities of the police, overseeing any police detention and interrogation of suspects held in garde à vue (custody), deciding whether the investigation should proceed, or whether an alternative to prosecution (such as mediation) is appropriate. In a minority of cases (just 4%) the procureur refers the case to the juge d’instruction, who possesses wider powers of investigation. 
(Or) In the case of a crime the involvement of a juge d’instruction is mandatory, whereas they are only involved in the investigation of a délit (offense) at the request of the procureur, or if it is a flagrant délit (blatant offense).
Leave those information at that.


Again from Freddie Kevin blog posting, SUARAM's own lawyer made this clarification:
“The only thing the French authorities will look into is the corruption or commission allegedly paid by DCN,” said Joseph Breham at a press conference organised by Suaram here. 
He added that the murder of the Mongolian woman is beyond the jurisdiction of the French authorities.
In addition, this April 2010 You Tube of French lawyer, Joseph Breham explained the French court interest and jurisdiction is on DCN and other French outfit but not any Malaysian entity:

The opening of enquiry was based on suspicions or suspected linkages by SUARAM's lawyer but it is still a long way for the French  juge d’instruction to consider whether there is sufficient evidence from the documents of the police and other future enquiries to pass to the "judgement judge" for the trial and "trial lawyers do the show-off work".

Repeatedly, Breham mentioned alleged payment of bribe by DCN or other French outfit and on French soil.

From their own lawyer's words, it proves that SUARAM was dramatising the court for attention to the point of misrepresentation. Now that they had the documents leaked, is anyone going to ask whether SUARAM is serious to have the court process move on?

Why was there no press conference that involved intenational media? Or French and international media knows there is no issue yet.

Perhaps they realised that there is not going to be any prosecution involving any Malaysian leader or citizen because there was no kickback or infringement of the OECD Convention on Bribery, which France ratified on June 30, 2000.

SUARAM is not serious to have a closure to this issue in order to stretch it to the 14th General Election.

They are only helping Anwar to dramatise the submarine allegations to have the public into believing there was corruption and murder rerlated to this arms purchase.

SUARAM was dramatising by lying.

This is not an open court hearing to bring in witness as claimed by SUARAM but only a closed tribunal.

It is not French Government investigations many of us are being misled by Asia Sentinel and SUARAM but SUARAM's complain and request for investigation. In the US, it is called class action.

There is no subpoena yet and there is no warrant of arrest for Dato Najib. It is all the impression created by SUARAM.

Will that mean that the same wrong impression was only created using the various allegations they made against the Government side from the documents they leaked?

Watch this space. It is a lie too!


Atuk Banjar Masin said...

Salam tuan empunya blog,

Tok mohon pertukaran link:

terima kasih

Anonymous said...

The lack of international media coverage must be because UMNO bribed everyone in the world. Bak kata puak-puak ni, UMNO kan korup..


Anonymous said...

Naj, even if our 'back-door' PM in waiting were to use all his billion-billion, he still cannot bribe everyone in the world.
Our gomen where got money one, already bankrupt what. So says the opp. Don't believe ah? ask Kim guan or Tonic phua chu kang.

Anonymous said...

Yep the 1/2 Billion kickback..oops...'commission' was done under proper procedures...yep the proper UNMO procedures to fleece the rakyat. Why are you defending this blatantly corrupt regime???
Nowadays corruption is euphemistically called as , commission, contract fees and what not...A rose by any other name is still a rose and corruption by any other name is still corruption.

Anonymous said...

I am sure the Singh knows something but the actual singh who is kingmaker is the relatively unknown recently made Tan sri who is vastly connected right to the very top of this country and that of a few others especialy our neighbour.Suram or PKR must get to him in order to sink the Sub once and for all if there is something to be sunk.He and the great Mamakutty knows it all.

My Say