Tuesday, August 04, 2015

1MDB gets vindicated as Najib's lawyers get QC input

I hear Najib Razak's lawyers have returned home from a sojourn during which they consulted with a Queen's Counsel on the possible next course of action against Wall Street Journal. I won't claim to know what the counsel might have been but now that it's clear the USD700 million did NOT come from 1MDB [as the Wall Street Journal's article had led many to believe][read RM2.6 billion not from 1MDB] it's only fair to expect the first ever court action against WSJ by a Malaysian Prime Minister. 

This morning on Twitter, I was told to read the WSJ article again and to do it properly. Nowhere in the article, I was told, did the WSJ accuse Najib Razak of stealing money from 1MDB and depositing in into his personal accounts. A fellow journalist provided this para from the original WSJ article to support this argument:

It's true, the WSJ did insert the above paragraph in its article. But a news report is read in its entirety for context. The impression that many Malaysians who are well-versed in the English language get when reading the whole WSJ article is that there is an attempt to link the USD700 mil that flowed to Najib's personal accounts and the 1MDB. Even the headline used was meant to make a connection, whether or not there was one: Investigators believe money flowed to Malaysian leader Najib's accounts amid 1MDB probe.  This was why the 1MDB had to quickly deny having given USD700 million to Najib and, similarly, why the PM came out to say he never misappropriated 1MDB funds of took public money for personal gain.

The CNBC report on July 3, based on its interview with Ken Brown, the WSJ bureau chief in Hong Kong, has the same impression about the WSJ's article:

 CNBC report

The second para says it: "... movement of cash from 1MDB ... before it landed at Najib's accounts, directly connecting the PM to the deeply indebted fund for the first time, the WSJ reported". 

Ken Brown never refuted the CNBC article which was based on its interview with him. Neither did WSJ nor Dow Jones. It was as if they wanted us to believe that there was a connection between 1MDB and the money that went into Najib's accounts.

Well, there is none now.

p.s. For the record, I must reiterate that I am never in favour of politicians sueing bona fide journalists (or bloggers). And I am wondering if the 1MDB is contemplating legal action against WSJ now that it's been vindicated by the MACC:

1MDB cleared 
“1MDB welcomes the clear statement from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, which confirms that no funds from 1MDB were transferred to the Prime Minister. 
We have always maintained that the company has never provided any funds to the Prime Minister as per our media statement on 3 July 2015, confident that the truth will prevail. 
To continue to suggest otherwise, as PKR secretary-general Rafizi Ramli did in his blog yesterday, is highly irresponsible and a deliberate attempt to undermine the company. 
This is despite 1MDB publishing  on 3 June 2015 a summary of what the RM42 billion debt has been used for, information that is fully disclosed in 1MDB's audited and publicly available accounts from 31 March 2010 to 31 March 2014. 
We reproduce here the two infographics of the summary."


  1. Anonymous2:58 pm

    Thats why you're not practising law. That para alone when read with the entire article means that they are not levelling any claims on 1mdb's fund. Anyways, if the law is based on what someone THINKS, i can also say the opposite of what you are saying. In this case, what is inked is king (borrowing najibs cash is king).

  2. Anonymous2:58 pm

    jom kita amik item no 1. tu pasal IPP dulu...ni bukan fitnah tp apa yg disiarkan di"jelas"kan oleh 1MDB...
    cer crite sikit "inherited debts" RM 6B tuuu...
    beli IPP mahal takpe, willing buyer, willing seller..
    tp utang IPP tu pu nak kena bayar & masukkan ke dalam kos jgk ke..?

    kalau IPP menguntungkan, tak perlu bayar utang2nya sekali..guna profit yg IPP tu generate utk bayar balik utang2 dia..
    kalau IPP tu tak menguntungkan, kenapa beli..? skrang nak tolak kat org lain plak, eg TNB..??

    cuba jelaskan yg ni dulu supaya kita bleh move ke item no. 2 tuu...
    kalau dah terang, boleh kita sama2 jelaskan kpd rakyat yg masih blurrrr....dan kebanyakannya yg blurrr ni penyokong membawa rebah, ie, bila takleh jawab, spi..bila dah abis modal spin, tuduh kianat lah dll...
    ok ya dt br, tolong selidik & bagi penjelasan...tq

  3. Anonymous3:04 pm

    Jelas UMNO berpendapat orang Melayu semuanya bodoh belaka.

    Tidak apa. Kita tunggu PRU.

    Terima Kasih.

    Anak Kampung


  4. Going technical is it? Is that your spin.

  5. RM1.2Billion dari Cayman tak boleh bawa balik kerana 'red-tape' Bank Negara. Terpaksa simpan di Singpura. Pasalapa tak guna duit tu untuk bayar interest...dah bertukar jadi 'unit'. Unit apa pun tak tau.
    USD700million masuk personal account PM, tak ada problem dari Bank Negara pulak.
    Siapa la agak yang murah hati derma USD700million kat Najib sebagai dana PRU13?
    Mesti Pak Arab. Patut pun percaya sangat pada Pak Arab.
    Mesti boleh bagi gelaran Dato pada penderma ni.

  6. Anonymous4:15 pm

    if najib want to win another election, he must get the trust of majority of the voters. he ain't got much nowadays, if you want to be honest about it.

    but if you want to pretend that people still support najib's BN, then you can just ignore them. pretend that everything is all ok. this is all a make belief by the opposition. people still shouting " I love PM" and "I am 4 u". do whatever you are doing.

    At your own peril...and die.

  7. Anonymous4:15 pm

    Bermula dari penafian masalah kewangan 1MDB, pasal Cayman, pasal unit, pasal bank di Singapore, pastu psal Tabung Haji, pasal Jho Low, pasal duit berbillion dlm akaun peribadi AMBank, pemecatan penjawat awam yg sedang melaksanakan tugas dll...satu-satu tembelang Najib pecah secara automatik dgn kuasa ALLAH SWT.....bau busukkk siot!!!

  8. Anonymous4:48 pm

    Queen's Counsel kat UK lah, bukan US, US mana ada Queen.

    Nak saman WSJ di UK ke?

  9. Anonymous5:01 pm

    It seems that it is okay to received money from donor i think for what ever reason. Now every Tom, Dick and Harry can receive money from donor.

  10. Mazlan5:58 pm

    Since WSJ is based in the US and article was published out of a US domain - then Najib would have to sue them in an American Court.
    He would then have to explain where that money came from and admit that he had a personal bank account of RM 2.6 Billion.
    I have a feeling that the WSJ and its lawyers would love to face Najib and his lawyers in court.....and they would love to open that whole can of worms as I would think WSJ has more details that they have not released yet.

    And can I ask you - why you don't find outrageous the fact that a sitting Prime Minister accepted foreign donations in the Billions into his own personal bank account? No one donates that much without expecting something in return - so what was Najib's quid pro quo?

  11. Anonymous6:11 pm

    Gosh rocky you have started to believe your own spin and lies.

  12. Anonymous6:22 pm

    I hope your paymasters are not using you as a yardstick for discernment and intelligence, when they come up with their dervish ideas.

  13. Anonymous7:00 pm

    Selamat berjaya bro. Setakat nak kejut dah consult QC tak payah bro. Dah banyak kali tersasar. Kalau Najib saman kat Uk or USA ,still nak kena proof duit derma dari mana kalau bukan dari 1MDB. Ingat kat USA and UK depa nak pakai statement SPRM. Kat sini boleh la you guna sikit sikit statement SPRM nak bagi orang keliru tapi kalau pi US dan UK ? Depa bukan bod*h macam Menteri Umno.

  14. Anonymous7:22 pm

    Syukurla Najib dah berjaya menyatukan rakyat. Semua org bersatu nak tengok dia masuk jail.

  15. Anonymous7:55 pm

    Don't you have any sense of decency left in your body Rocky? Duit tak boleh bawak masuk kubur bro...

  16. Anonymous8:33 pm

    Pls find all the excuses bro...but money is deposited into his personal account. The PM bro.....apa ni, takde org lain yg lebih baik ker. Teruk sangat ker Msia ni sampai dah mcm2 kes pun nak kekalkan lagi...hancus bro, hancus

    Jln Reko

  17. Anonymous8:40 pm

    SERIOUSLY????....i mean did you really mean what you wrote? Its unbelievable. If a man of your stature and ur experience believes whatever that is being bandied about by a bunch of morons who take us Malaysians for fools, then we as a nation are indeed in dire straits. Perhaps you could assist then, by explaining why werent this explanation of the RM 2.6 Billion being a donation stated earlier. Did someone somewhere needed time to come up with it? Infographics WILL never provide any assurance that all is well with 1MDB. Nor will all these explanations and so-called statements will instill confidence in this government. If you have got the ears of those pll in Putrajaya, pls tell them a few things.... Ppl in general DO NOT believe whatever they say, ppl in general are angry and extremely upset with all these corrupt act, ppl in general are not convinced 1MDB will ever be successful, come next election no amount of tv ads, poster, t-shirts, will ever help BN and tell them in the end they are answerable to their Creator!

  18. Anonymous9:23 pm

    rocky...ko boleh derma skit rm 2.60 jer...

  19. Jom kita "putar" lagi !

  20. My question is whether the fund came from 1MDB is important, or whether the fact that it went directly into the personal account of the PM?

    If a respectable journalist like this blogwriter thinks that the latter action is still within the law, then, I think Malaysia has gone down the gutter.

    The fact is the SPRM Act defines "suapan" to include "DERMA".

    Check the AKTA yourself.

  21. Anonymous11:11 pm

    If najib can survive this , the only explanation I can think of is that he had sold his soul to the devil. I don't God is so kind to grant him such miracle

  22. Great! I hope Najib will sue WSJ and not chicken out.

    That lawsuit would reveal the truth far more than the government's task force, parliamentary committee, MACC, Bank Negara, investigations could. You can bet that WSJ would not roll over.

    I would love to see Najib and his gang (including BNM and other bank officers, MACC investigators, etc.,) grilled by American lawyers. That trial would expose the rot in our institutions as well as the sorry caliber of our top officials far more than a Malaysian royal commission could.

    So Rocky and others, if you can use your influence in any away to NOT let Najib chicken out of this lawsuit, you will rendering a great service to the nation.

    As a preview I recommend your readers view the trial (there are videos somewhere) on the brother of the Sultan of Brunei being sued in US.

    One thought. Why choose a QC lawyer when the suit will be in the US? Unless Najib is scared to sue WSJ directly rather its HK publisher. Though HK is no longer a British colony, its legal system is still British-based. Hence the choice of a QC, probably.

    I would have thought Najib would have picked one of those smart legal eagles in NY. Perhaps he could not find one. In US if a lawyer sues and the case is later found to be utterly without foundation, meaning, frivolous and taking the court's time, the lawyer involved could be disciplined. Plus WSJ could recoup its legal costs.

    Also under British law, unlike in the US, public officials enjoy greater privacy protection. In US you have to prove the element of malice or willful intention plus damage. Najib's reputation is already in the gutter, so it would be difficult to prove further damage!

    I had never been impressed with the advice Najib had been getting. As he said he picks his advisors (and that include legal ones I presume) based not on smarts but on their loyalty.

    One small question. Who is paying the lawyers, the government or Najib? I suppose when he gets 2 billion in his bank account as a "donation," that is a mute question.

    M. Bakri Musa, (www.bakrimusa.com)

  23. trifling-jester6:19 am

    Does it bother you the PM of malaysia receives cash donations in the billions without the cabinet knowing? Probably not since that's probably how your bills are paid

  24. Anonymous8:43 am


  25. kecewa dengan rockybru. tot u were the nuetral ones. sigh.

  26. Anonymous10:49 am

    bro, as mentioned by our dearest PM, the current government is facing a deficit perception & your bull shit crap spin doesn't help... sudah-sudah lah... berangan nak jadi future menteri komunikasi ker?

  27. Anonymous9:27 am

    rocky bru ni die die pun support jib la, jib said "I help u, u help me" mah... 0.01% of 2.6B pun cukup lor