Which one of Najib’s highly-paid consultants was responsible for the most contrived, damaging and tell-tale statement in the Prime Minister’s FAQ admitting that there is serious public perception that Najib is implicated in the Altantunya murder
I do not think I am the only one mulling over the statement in the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s FAQ on his blog with regard to “Allegations regarding the Altantuya issue”, as the more one thinks about it, the more one is astounded by it.
Which one of Najib’s highly-paid consultants was responsible for the most contrived, damaging and tell-tale statement in his FAQ admitting that there is serious public perception that the Prime Minister is implicated in the murder of the Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu nine years ago.
This is the statement I am referring to:
“What is important is that the judgment brings justice to everyone, most importantly to the family of the victim, to the accused and even to me.”
I cannot believe that Najib could have made such a statement on his own accord, as it is “too clever by half”, claiming that the Federal Court judgment in January on the Altantunya murder nine years ago convicting and passing the death sentence on the two accused, former police special commando Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azhar Umar had in one fell swoop, done justice to Altantunya’s family, the accused and “even to me”!
Najib could not be so naïve as to believe that the Federal Court judgement convicting and sentencing to death the two former police special commandoes have brought closure to the family of the victim.
Otherwise, Altantunya’s father Shaariibuu Setev and three other family members would not have proceeded with their RM100 million civil suit against the Malaysian Government for Altantuya’s death, as the Mongolian was shot dead and her body blown up with C-4 military explosives in a forest area in Shah Alam on Nov 7, 2006.
It is even more astounding that Najib could entertain any thought that the Federal Court judgement would be received by the two accused and their families as “just deserts” for their heinous crimes, or Sirul Azhar would not presently be in Villawood immigration detention centre in Sydney seeking asylum in Australia on the ground that he had been made a “scapegoat” as he had acted under orders when he and Azilah committed the crime in 2006.
Would Najib allow Azilah to inform Parliament and the nation what he thinks of Sirul’s plea that he is a being made a scapegoat as both of them had acted under orders to kill Altantuya.
But what takes the cake is the third assertion, that the Federal Court judgment has done justice, “even to Najib”?
How could this be done, apart from the very tell-tale admission that there is serious public perception that Najib is implicated in the murder of the Mongolian woman Altantuya Shaariibuu nine years ago?
Did the Federal Court judgment categorically and conclusively rule out any possibility of Najib or anyone else as in any way implicated in Altantuya’s murder, such as ordering that the Mongolian be killed and her body blown up by C4 military explosives?
Of course not, as this issue was studiously and completely avoided during the nine-year trial of Azila and Sirul.
This is exactly why the issue of who, if anyone, had ordered Altantuya’s killing remain a very live and real issue, and it will continue to be so, so long as this Whodunit question in her murder remain unanswered and unresolved.
As Prime Minister, Najib must ensure that the question of who, if any, ordered Altantuya’s murder must be answered, and as Najib has declared that he was not involved in Altantuya’s murder and did not know anything about it, and he had even made Sumpah Laknat, he should have no qualms about instituting a full inquiry to find these answers to the Altantunya’s murder.
Najib should know that making Sumpah Laknat is no replacement for a rigorous process of judicial inquiry or we might do away with the judicial system altogether and just rely on a system of Sumpah Laknats to deal with crimes.
If Najib is really concerned about ensuring justice for himself and the country’s institutions, particularly the rule of law and the credibility and the reputation of the Prime Minister over Altantutya’s murder, he and the Cabinet should not delay any further but should immediately set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry with two terms of reference: (i) Who ordered Altantuya to be killed; and (II) Whether there was a nine-year “conspiracy of silence” involving the Police, the Attorney-General and the judiciary as well as others to avoid probing into the motives for the killing of Altantuya?