NINE QUESTIONS FOR SARAWAK REPORT: CURRENT / THE SLOW, DELIBERATE DEFEAT OF THE 2015 MALAYSIAN COUP D'ETAT

👇🏽
– - –

1.
2. RELATED: 1MDB REPORT: PAC ZEROES IN ON FORMER CEO SHAHROL AS AMONG THE CULPRITS
3. RELATED: PAC 1MDB REPORT EVADED PM'S ROLE AS ADVISER, CLAIMS KIT SIANG
4. RELATED: NAJIB WAS NEVER DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN 1MDB'S AFFAIRS, PAC DEPUTY CHIEF SAYS
5. RELATED: FULL INTERVIEW WITH PAC CHAIRMAN HASAN ARIFIN

– - –

LIKE IT OR NOT, NAJIB WINS THIS ROUND

Despite ongoing international probes into 1MDB, it is likely that the Opposition has been outplayed.

REPORTED BY FREE MALAYSIA TODAY

by Scott Ng

The release of the Public Accounts Committee report on the 1MDB scandal has been trumpeted as sweet vindication for our Prime Minister.

For the better part of the past 12 months, Najib Razak has been judged in the court of public opinion as a dictator, a perpetrator of grand corruption, an accessory to murder and even a coward. There have been videos of football fans belting out songs that call for his resignation, art works depicting him as a clown and even a case of someone screaming a profanity at him as he made his way through a crowd.

These have all instilled a belligerent mood amongst the rakyat, and the PAC report is not likely to silence his most ardent detractors. However, even with the investigations in Hong Kong, Switzerland, the United States and Singapore continuing, it is likely that the PM has won this round.

The latest news has been nothing but positive not only for Putrajaya, but ordinary citizens as well. 1MDB has put out statements acknowledging its failures and saying that the repayment of its huge debts is well under way. The ringgit has rallied, buoyed by stronger oil prices and returning investment that had been spooked by the perceived instability of the political situation here. Several mega projects that may prove a boon to the economy – like the High Speed Rail – are on the cards, Sarawak will receive unprecedented levels of development expenditure upon BN’s expected win, and Johor seems to be coming into its own.

There is not much other than the sweltering weather for the layman to complain about.

For Najib’s opponents, it must seem like throwing oneself against a steel wall endlessly.

No matter how bad it gets, nothing seems to get him.

The fact is that the iron has cooled, and the release of the PAC report assures Najib and his supporters that he is unassailable, at least in Malaysia. He is cleared in the eyes of the law here, and an investigation is merely an investigation unless something concrete is found and brought to court. The Opposition will surely fight against the notion that the PAC’s final report is the last word on the 1MDB issue, but unless a smoking gun is turned up, the PM has no reason to believe his unified front will crumble.

The Opposition has, for far too long, failed to name a candidate leader despite Anwar Ibrahim’s incarceration. With due respect to Wan Azizah Ismail, it is obvious to the ordinary member of the public that she does not want to lead.

The Opposition’s failure to capitalise on the overwhelming weakness of the Prime Minister is ultimately not due to Anwar’s absence. Members of the various parties in Pakatan Harapan have been too preoccupied with power struggles and petty squabbles for the coalition to be effective. They have been too unwilling to address the weaknesses of Pakatan’s fundamentals.

Pakatan will need to buck up in the few years that are left before GE14 because, unless some damning piece of evidence turns up from the international investigations, Najib is not going anywhere despite his record as the most unpopular PM in history.

If Najib eases the heavy hand he has used on dissent over the past 12 months, the curses will dissipate or at least be reduced to mere murmurs of discontent. He may never be truly popular again, but unless the Opposition steps up and rallies around a candidate leader, one who can start work tomorrow, is qualified, determined, principled, and hard working, Najib will win the coming general election.

('Like it or not, Najib wins this round.' – Free Malaysia Today, April 10, 2016)

– - –

1. LIKE IT OR NOT, NAJIB WINS THIS ROUND
2.
3. RELATED: PAC 1MDB REPORT EVADED PM'S ROLE AS ADVISER, CLAIMS KIT SIANG
4. RELATED: NAJIB WAS NEVER DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN 1MDB'S AFFAIRS, PAC DEPUTY CHIEF SAYS
5. RELATED: FULL INTERVIEW WITH PAC CHAIRMAN HASAN ARIFIN

– - –

RELATED: 1MDB REPORT: PAC ZEROES IN ON FORMER CEO SHAHROL AS AMONG THE CULPRITS

REPORTED BY THE STAR

KUALA LUMPUR: The Parliamentary Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has found that former 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) chief executive officer Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi (pic) should be held responsible for the "weaknesses and constraints" faced by the state investment arm.

"We urge the authorities to conduct an investigation on Shahrol and those related," said the PAC in a 106-page report on 1MDB tabled on Thursday in Parliament.

The PAC probe into 1MDB began in May 2015 but was abruptly halted in July following a Cabinet reshuffle that saw first-time MP Datuk Hasan Arifin replacing former committee chairman Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed, who was appointed Deputy Home Minister.

Among those called to testify before the PAC were 1MDB chairman Tan Sri Lodin Wok Kamaruddin, current president and CEO Arul Kanda Kandasamy and Shahrol.

As a state investment arm, PAC said, 1MDB should have implemented "best practices in their management."

"After looking through the final reports by the Auditor-General Department and PAC proceedings, we have found that the management and the board of directors was weak.

"The management had repeatedly not complied with decisions and orders made by the board of directors or the management took its own decisions before going though it with the board of directors," said PAC.

There were also a few investments and huge loans secured that were done without proper valuation and its impact on the company's cash flow, said PAC.

('1MDB report: PAC zeroes in on former CEO Shahrol as among the culprits.' – The Star, April 7, 2016)

– - –

1. LIKE IT OR NOT, NAJIB WINS THIS ROUND
2. RELATED: 1MDB REPORT: PAC ZEROES IN ON FORMER CEO SHAHROL AS AMONG THE CULPRITS
3.
4. RELATED: NAJIB WAS NEVER DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN 1MDB'S AFFAIRS, PAC DEPUTY CHIEF SAYS
5. RELATED: FULL INTERVIEW WITH PAC CHAIRMAN HASAN ARIFIN

– - –

RELATED: PAC 1MDB REPORT EVADED PM'S ROLE AS ADVISER, CLAIMS KIT SIANG

Citing the PAC report, Lim said it was “incorrect and misleading” to state that the management structure of 1MDB is divided into three tiers - the advisory board, the board of directors and top management.

REPORTED BY MALAYSIAKINI

Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak’s role as state-owned fund 1MDB’s adviser is an “elephant in the room” which has been evaded by the Public Accounts Committee in its probe report, DAP veteran Lim Kit Siang claimed today.

Lim said this was based on Article 117 of the 1MDB Memorandum and Articles of Association (M&A) which requires all major decisions of the company involving financial commitment and restructuring to have Najib’s written authorisation.

“…It is the prime minister who is the most important player in 1MDB, exceeding the role of the Advisory Board, the board of directors and the top management all added together,” said Lim during a speech in Kepala Batas this morning.
Citing the PAC report, Lim said it was “incorrect and misleading” to state that the management structure of 1MDB is divided into three tiers - the advisory board, the board of directors and top management.

“There are in fact four tiers of management authority in 1MDB, namely the prime minister by virtue of Article 117 of 1MDB M&A, the advisory board, the board of directors and the top management, with the prime minister in overall direct control of 1MDB...

“Arising from Article 117, the person who must bear the greatest responsibility for 1MDB must be the prime minister who exercises direct control over 1MDB, as all important investment and restructuring decisions of 1MDB requires his written authorisation,” said the Gelang Patah MP.

The PAC in its report released on April 7 has recommended that 1MDB former chief executive officer Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi and others in the management should be held responsible for the weaknesses in the administration of the state-owned fund.

Lim, however, said that it would be unfair for them to be the only ones made accountable if based on the prime minister’s role as stated in Article 117.

While Petaling Jaya MP Tony Pua had said he was “80 percent satisfied” with contents of the PAC report, Lim said he would only give it a 60 percent mark.

He said this was based on the PAC’s failure to scrutinise Najib’s role; failure to summon several key witnesses including tycoon Low Taek Jho or Jho Low; as well as having allegedly allowed Najib and other Barisan Nasional to distort the findings of its report in their favour.

Lim, as such, said he has invited PAC chairperson Hasan Arifin to attend a public forum on April 13 if he insists that the PAC report exonerates Najib from any wrongdoing or abuse of power.

Najib, as well as other Barisan Nasional ministers and leaders, had described findings of the PAC report as proof of “false allegations” made by their critics in an attempt to topple the government.

('PAC 1MDB report evaded PM's role as adviser, claims Kit Siang.' – MalaysiaKini, April 10, 2016)

– - –
1. LIKE IT OR NOT, NAJIB WINS THIS ROUND
2. RELATED: 1MDB REPORT: PAC ZEROES IN ON FORMER CEO SHAHROL AS AMONG THE CULPRITS
3. RELATED: PAC 1MDB REPORT EVADED PM'S ROLE AS ADVISER, CLAIMS KIT SIANG

4.
5. RELATED: FULL INTERVIEW WITH PAC CHAIRMAN HASAN ARIFIN

– - –

RELATED: NAJIB WAS NEVER DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN 1MDB'S AFFAIRS, PAC DEPUTY CHIEF SAYS

Tan, who is a DAP lawmaker, said the actual decision-makers in the firm were its board members and management.

REPORTED BY THE MALAY MAIL ONLINE

KUALA LUMPUR, April 7, 2016 –

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) does not hold Datuk Seri Najib Razak responsible for any of the alleged missteps taken by 1Malaysia Development Board (1MDB) as the prime minister had merely acted as adviser.

PAC deputy chairman Dr Tan Seng Giaw said during the committee’s investigation on 1MDB, it was made known that Najib was not directly involved in the firm’s management.

Tan, who is a DAP lawmaker, said the actual decision-makers in the firm were its board members and management.

“So these people we have to probe — that will be the correct thing to do,” he said when approached by reporters at the lobby of the Dewan Rakyat here.

“Legally speaking, how can you take action on those who have done nothing,” he added, referring to Najib.

“From our investigations, we found that he (Najib) is not directly involved. His name only appears in the board of advisers,” Tan explained further.

The Kepong MP also said that the rule of law in Malaysia is such that a person is innocent until proven guilty.

The PAC in its report released today urged the authorities to investigate former 1MDB CEO Datuk Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi over weaknesses in the company’s management.

In the report, the panel said 1MDB’s board of directors failed in their responsibilities to the company and its shareholders by allowing its management to make decisions that were not in line with good accounting practises.

1MDB is currently under probe by the authorities in several countries, with Luxembourg the latest to investigate the state investment firm for alleged money laundering.

('Najib was never directly involved in 1MDB's affairs, PAC deputy chief says.' – The Malay Mail Online, April 7, 2016)

– - –

RELATED: FULL INTERVIEW WITH PAC CHAIRMAN HASAN ARIFIN
We stand by these findings, with the knowledge that there is no hidden agenda and no outside influence on this report.

REPORTED BY THE STAR

KUALA LUMPUR (BERNAMA), April 8, 2016 –

Below is an English translation of interview conducted with Public Accounts Committee chairman Datuk Hasan Arifin.

1. Can Datuk share what happened during the 1MDB proceedings?

The 1MDB proceedings differed from the usual PAC process. Going by procedure, the National Audit Department will table the Report of the Auditor-General in the Dewan Rakyat. The PAC will receive a copy of the report and will examine issues with with the 3P elements, namely 'pembaziran' (wastage), 'penyalahgunaan kuasa' (abuse of power) and 'pemborosan' (leakages) in the government ministries, departments and agencies as well as government-linked companies (GLCs).

However, in the 1MDB proceedings and investigation, the PAC took the pre-emptive measure. And, that's its advantage, as the PAC is not subject to any directive, including from the government, to undertake an investigation. In other words, we are free to undertake an investigation. Although 1MDB was not mentioned in the Report of the Auditor-General, the PAC took the initiative to undertake an investigation in the interests of the people, nation and as a whole.

The Cabinet instructed the National Audit Department to conduct a thorough audit of 1MDB, not just in terms of its finances but also operations and governance, and submit it to the PAC. However, the PAC did not wait for the report of the National Audit Department. Instead, it conducted its own proceedings from May 19 (2015) by calling up all directly responsible for 1MDB, including the Ministry of Finance as a shareholder in the company.

In this case, the Cabinet instructed the National Audit Department to scrutinise the 1MDB financial statements and submit the findings to the PAC. The PAC then began its proceedings on 19 May 2015, and we called up witnesses and requested additional documents to complete the report for tabling in Parliament.

More important, the statement of every witness called up by the PAC also assisted the National Audit Department to complete its report before the 1MDB Full Audit Report by the National Audit Department was presented to the PAC on March 4. As such, there was a check and balance with regard to that report.

The 1MDB Governance Management Control Report of the PAC tabled in the Dewan Rakyat on April 7 was prepared by the PAC Secretariat based on facts and information in the 1MDB Full Audit Report of the National Audit Department and the statements from witnesses obtained during the 1MDB proceedings.

2. Can you list for us who has been found responsible or culpable, or who are the individuals who should be further investigated and at which stage you identified them to be referred to?

The Committee does not serve to identify who is at fault, but to only present what we found.

The following is the summary of conclusions from the report:

I. There is no evidence to suggest there was criminal misconduct related to misappropriation of funds or investment transactions or any 1MDB activities leading to illegal activities. In particular, the PAC did not find any evidence to indicate any wrongdoing or abuse of power by the Prime Minister in relation to 1MDB.

II. PAC also found that the RM42 billion of 1MDB's debts were not 'lost' as alleged by various parties, as all have been accounted for, and no payment was made from 1MDB to the Prime Minister's personal account.

III. PAC, however, identified several instances where the 1MDB management failed to comply with proper governance processes. This includes not carrying out specific instructions by the Board of Directors (BOD), making decisions before receiving full approval from the BOD, and failing to be transparent with the BOD. To that end, specific recommendations were also stated in the report where we believe the relevant authorities will evaluate and take action, if necessary.

3. Is there a mechanism for any individual to appeal against the fact-finding produced by PAC, such as through the courts or a judicial review?

Given that the PAC does not issue penalties, there is no need for appeals. The jurisdiction of the PAC is to verify fiduciary compliance and to voice out the irregularities that require further assessment or investigation from the relevant authorities.

4. Now that we have found elements of misconduct in this GLC, is there any basis for further evaluation of other GLCs?

To provide a more accurate explanation, the PAC findings were not geared towards misconduct,which is a pejorative or misleading term. The findings of the PAC, however, found chronic failure in following processes that have been outlined, regulations and procedures, in which the management, and not the government, should be responsible.

PAC is a body for compliance, transparency and following the processes. PAC feels that more audit operations (should be) carried out involving public or government funds that will give us the ability to identify any operation levels that need improvement or be implemented better.

5. Does the PAC only investigate transactions done, or does the PAC also investigate who gives the order to carry out the transactions, of which one is governance, and the other is a crime?

PAC proceedings involve very thorough and comprehensive review of documentation, approval, and its processes. At any time during the proceedings, if the committee feels there is a need for further investigation, we will call up the individual involved and ask for an explanation.

The PAC report to Parliament contains recommendations for further investigation.

It then is at the discretion of the relevant authorities to determine how the follow-up is done. PAC is not an executive or judicial body, but the findings will be useful to both bodies, in addition to Parliament, where it (PAC) was established.

6. Why was the Prime Minister's role not mentioned in PAC's report regarding 1MDB?

The government has always maintained its stance that the allegations made in respect of corruption, misappropriation of funds and abuse of power are false and baseless.

Over a period of 18 months, there have been various accusations and charges against the Prime Minister. Each charge was investigated by the PAC.

PAC did not find any evidence to indicate wrongdoing or abuse of power by the Prime Minister, and the decision was made unanimously and by consensus of all members of the PAC.

7. How did PAC reach to the conclusions, and are you confident that the findings would not be doubted by the people?

PAC made the conclusions through continous proceedings with the individuals called up, gathering of information, obtaining information, and through a collaboration with the National Audit Department and Ministry of Finance.

With a composition of members from various parties, impartiality, and the ability to access a variety of resources, we are confident the PAC has fulfilled, even gone beyond what people expected.

We stand by these findings, with the knowledge that there is no hidden agenda and no outside influence on this report.

8. Were the investigation directives different when the PAC was chaired by Datuk Nur Jazlan Mohamed and after it was taken over by Datuk Hasan Arifin?

The PAC proceedings were conducted in accordance to the defined process, which has to be adhered to no matter who chairs the committee.

The creation of a bipartisan committee comprising representatives from both sides (government and opposition) is to ensure impartiality, integrity and accuracy.

9. How are we to believe the findings of the PAC?

PAC is a standing committee of the Dewan Rakyat. PAC is a multi-party committee and is independent from the government. It only answers to the Parliament, and it therefore directly answers to the people.

Please refer to the PAC report and I am sure you will be able to see the precision in its scope, the professionalism of its methodology, and comprehesiveness of its recommendations.

10. Why does the list of witnesses called not include the Prime Minister, the Bank Negara Governor and Jho Low?

Call-ups to provide statements begin with the management and board of directors, and if there is a need to call outside parties to give statements, we will do so, but in this case based on the conclusive facts, there was no need to go in that direction.

11. Does the outcome represent a consensus of the committee and were there objections from among the committee members over the report?

Although there were objections, there were valid reasons, and it is important to state that the committee comprised Members of Parliament from both sides. Therefore, this PAC report is based on a unanimous consensus after debates were held to find a common ground

The PAC is a body which does not side with anyone and seeks the truth with the focus of providing the truth to the people through Parliament.

12. Since the PAC is a bi-partisan committee of lawmakers from both sides, was there difficulty in reaching a unanimous decision on the findings of the inquiry?

The non-partisan nature of the committee, the ability to meet without the presence of the media, members of the public and government officials, and access to unlimited information through Parliament's many resources, enabled it to reach conclusions which were balanced, accurate and fair. True, there was debate and protests over several issues, but we finally arrived at the conclusions as shown in this PAC report.

13. Who should the PAC answer to?

The PAC is a committee selected by the Dewan Rakyat. The membership of the PAC represents various national legislative bodies. The membership is a cross-section of parties, with five members from opposition parties and eight backbenchers.

As a Parliamentary body and not a governmental one, this committee can conduct an independent investigation without any interference and obstacles or being partisan. It only answers to Parliament, therefore to the people.

We can confirm the integrity and neutrality throughout the proceedings of the PAC, and there were no instances when the PAC was disturbed or instructed by any outsiders.

14. Who selected the members and chairman of the PAC?

To maintain the integrity, balance, cross-balance of the political parties and to be bi-partisan, a tight process was created.

The chairman (from backbenchers) and deputy (from the opposition) were appointed through a motion in Parliament by the Prime Minister which will be debated in the Dewan Rakyat and motion will be carried by a majority vote in the Dewan.

Conventionally, the chairman comes from the backbenchers and the deputy from the opposition.

Nobody can appoint or sack a PAC member as it must be done collectively by MPs who represent the people to seek out facts and the truth without favouring anyone.

15. What are the powers of the PAC?

The Standing Orders of the Dewan Rakyat created the PAC and its powers.

The Standing Orders gave the PAC the powers to investigate:

i. Federal accounts and the use of funds passed by Parliament for public spending

ii. Any accounts of the public authorities or any other bodies which administer public funds which were brought before the Dewan Rakyat.

iii. The Auditor-General's report which is tabled by the Auditor-General in the Dewan Rakyat, in line with Article 107 of the Federal Constitution

iv. Other issues deemed necessary to be looked into by the PAC or referred to the PAC by the Dewan Rakyat

It is important to state that the PAC is not an executive body, but the PAC is an independent body and not influenced by anyone in the search for truth to present facts to the people through Parliament.

16. Why was there a delay in presenting the report?

The PAC report must be detailed. It would not be right if the PAC announced an immature outcome of investigations without having access to whatever latest information from as many sources as possible.

There were claims that the changes in the membership of PAC also changed the direction of the proceedings, but these claims are not true. If you read the PAC report now, nothing was overlooked.

17. Has this report been checked and verified by independent bodies outside Malaysia or outside the influence of the government?

This PAC model has been tested and confirmed to be successful, and it is similar to the models in the Commonwealth nations. It is a respected body and a process which has long existed in democratic countries including the United Kingdom, New Zealand and South Africa, to name a few countries. It is an important platform for government accountability and it is practised by the international community.

The PAC has been proven to be a body with the experience to conduct detailed investigations, often to reach difficult conclusions. This proves that the PAC members are free from any interference, biasness or pressure from outside parties.

The task of the PAC is to prepare a comprehensive report on the governance of a company, body or government department. This has been successfully achieved and in the case of 1MDB, the PAC also submitted detailed recommendations to the government to consider and implement.

18. Did the PAC collaborate with governments of the United States, Switzerland and Australia in the investigation into 1MDB?

The powers of the PAC is to conduct a detailed assessment of 1MDB, based on the report and proceedings of the Audit Department. So far, no outside body from outside the country has contacted the PAC on 1MDB or was there a need to contact them.

19. Since the investigations have been completed and there has been no wrongdoing by the Prime Minister and the government, will legal action be taken against any party for spreading allegations about 1MDB?

The PAC is not the right body for you to ask that question. We can only comment on the PAC report and the outcome of the investigation. However, we have made recommendations for further action. It is up to the relevant authorities to decide the next action to take.