In case anyone did not notice, we wrote in our posting yesterday:
Only Allah knows the ultimate truth but for us mere mortal, the truth lies with the authority. The statement by AG Tan Sri Gani Patail to "semak" [read here] led some to suspect the existence of documentary evidences.We are no prophet and God has not spoken directly to us.
However, the authority has. It is NEITHER Sarawak Report, WSJ, The Edge, or other satellite media, NOR Tony Pua and Rafizi. The taskforce on the investigation of the Ambank accounts just gave a statement an hour or two ago, below:
KENYATAAN MEDIAThere are 6 accounts frozen and 17 accounts from two banks investigated.
SIASATAN PASUKAN PETUGAS KHAS BERKENAAN DAKWAAN DANA DISALURKAN KE AKAUN PERDANA MENTERI
Susulan kepada kenyataan media bertarikh 4 Julai 2015, Pasukan Petugas Khas ingin memaklumkan kemajuan tindakan-tindakan yang telah diambil oleh Pasukan ini sehingga kini.
Perintah pembekuan enam akaun bank pihak-pihak yang dipercayai terlibat dalam kes ini telah pun dikeluarkan pada 6 Julai 2015.
Selain itu, Pasukan Petugas Khas telah mengambil dokumen-dokumen berkaitan 17 akaun dari dua buah bank bagi membantu siasatan.
Pasukan Petugas Khas juga telah mengambil dokumen-dokumen melibatkan isu ketidakpatuhan peraturan-peraturan dan kaedah Bank Negara Malaysia oleh bank terbabit.
Siasatan masih berjalan. Justeru, Pasukan Petugas Khas menyeru kepada semua pihak agar memberi kerjasama sepenuhnya bagi melengkapkan siasatan.
Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail
Peguam Negara Malaysia
Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz
Gabenor Bank Negara Malaysia
Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar
Ketua Polis Negara Malaysia
Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed
Ketua Pesuruhjaya, Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia
7 Julai 2015
There will be those likely to speculate the three accounts mentioned by Wall Street Journal exist. It is most likely but it is not mentioned, thus not confirmed.
Some commentators said Dato Najib could authorise the Banks to issue a statement on his personal accounts and reveal the full content of his banks statement. If it is his accounts, it could be done. But if the accounts do not exist and not his, it cannot be done.
Down there, the public feels Ambank could make a denial statement on the non-existent of such accounts. That is speculations that only leads to perception. No way of stopping what people think. It is easier to get factual.
As of today, there have been no statement other than this from Bank Negara Malaysia. None from Ambank. Yesterday, Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim said BAFIA does not allow BNM and Ambank to comment on clients' accounts.
Thus far, The Star's claim that there will be a lawsuit by Dato Najib on Wall Street Journal have not happened.
It is not as easy as buying murtabak.
Update 10:30 PM
Just checked our smartphone to find the following message sent during the break of fast:
Subsequently, we received the following at 10:00 PM.
Sarawak Report was showing the following on their website:
With the swings in information streaming in, the suggestion would be to not be too quick wiyh conclusion.
Sit back and watch the events unfold. Heard more interesting to come after Raya.
Could the announcement today be about giving allowance for Ambank to bypass BAFIA to make statement on the alleged Najib's account?
Whether one believe the WSJ document or not, the story is still incomplete. How could such transaction occur and money got deposited? Why 2 years later for BNM; sleeping on the job?
It is the beginning of malam tujuh likur or holiest last 10 nights of Ramadhan. For Muslims, lets not put that to waste.
Bro,
ReplyDeleteYou said: "Some commentators said Dato Najib could authorise the Banks to issue a statement on his personal accounts and reveal the full content of his banks statement. If it is his accounts, it could be done. But if the accounts do not exist and not his, it cannot be done."
Congratulation because you are now edging closer to common sense. At least you got half of the point.
If the account are not his (Najib), yes; Ambank could not disclose its content or details however they (Ambank) could make a statutory declaration to state that the account said does not exist or simply belong to someone else! This does not goes against BAFIA reg.
Again you talk about if! so many if! if the account is not his?! then....and so on....
the reality is; it has been nearly 5 days since the accusation of WSJ began and none of the more simpler action above has happen....no sue? no direct denial? no authorization for AMBANK to disclose the account (if it is Najib's) and if its not, no denial from AMBANK.
How do yo expect for the people to have confidence in NAJIB?
The banks can always easily confirmed the existence of the said accounts..
ReplyDeleteWhy make things difficult...!!!
"But if the accounts do not exist and not his, it cannot be done". Then make a statutory declaration to say you never have such accounts. Susah ke?
ReplyDeleteEspecially if one is guilty as hell....
ReplyDelete"It is easier to get factual". Indeed, WSJ has just published online some of the incriminating documents. But of course some will still say WSJ falsified the documents and another "Justo" will emerge to verify that.
ReplyDeleteSome commentators said Dato Najib could authorise the Banks to issue a statement on his personal accounts and reveal the full content of his banks statement. If it is his accounts, it could be done. But if the accounts do not exist and not his, it cannot be done."
ReplyDeleteWrong, he can do the first, authorise the banks or ask the banks to confirm the accounts are not his or he is not the beneficiary.
"Down there, the public feels Ambank could make a denial statement on the non-existent of such accounts. That is speculations that only leads to perception. No way of stopping what people think. It is easier to get factual."
If |Ambank makes a statement then it becomes factual, that is the point.
"Thus far, The Star's claim that there will be a lawsuit by Dato Najib on Wall Street Journal have not happened.
It is not as easy as buying murtabak."
Sorry, he should just come out strongly say he will 100% sue and do all in his power to use - simple
Belon...dh besar nih...
ReplyDeleteBecause the authority cannot be trusted....could be reasons....reputation of Bank Negara at stake. If the Najib account never follow the law, why should other corporate companies and individual follow the banking law. Selective implementation, Bank Negara cannot be trusted and lose credibility....same with MACC, AG and others. The public WILL NEVER TRUST these instutitions again like they don't trust Najib at all...Why should Najib still be PM since he lost the ppl trust in him?
ReplyDeletePlease ask him goto swear in the mosque again, maybe 2nd time trick...can be reused.
11.47 PM
DeleteYou are generalising!
Your sweeping prejudice agst authorities indicate irrational behaviour and bordering on madness.
Any accusation must be specific with its case fact or at least some related doubt..
Can you prove the authorities have denigrated their duties for this specific transfer of money case????
the process to sue will take a bit of time. we understand that. for him to outright deny and threaten to sue is already a big step forward. but he didn't do that, and he just lost it. lost it big time. furthermore with the froozen accounts and speedy investigation by authorities just make the WSJ story credible.
ReplyDeletei take your word a few weeks back that once proven that najib is responsible with this 1MDB debacle, he must be accountable and deserve to go to jail. i hope that you will be man enough to accept that once everything is unravel.
don't be like PAS or PKR totok that wont accept their bosses are mere human being with flaws and are sinners too.
Is that the tampered document of xavier justo used by wsj????
ReplyDeleteAnything is possible. Could najib start suing wsj?
In a few days, we will see.