Is Azalina seriously suggesting that Muhyiddin should lodge a police report that when he was DPM, he had been informed by Gani Patai, then Attorney-General, that Prime Minister Najib had committed a criminal act?
Two most extraordinary statements in Malaysian politics were made yesterday – one by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin who was sacked as Deputy Prime Minister in the Najib “purges” of July 28 and suspended as UMNO Deputy President on Friday and the other by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, one of the beneficiaries of the Najib “purges” and now a member of the troika of Najib’s foremost propagandists.
Muhyiddin revealed that before he was summarily sacked as Deputy Prime Minister, he was presented with evidence by the then Attorney-General, Tan Sri Gani Patail about the deposits from the state-owned SRC International into Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s personal bank accounts and informed that a crime had been committed by Najib.
This has led promptly to a statement by Azalina with the accusation of Muhyiddin in “a high-level conspiracy to topple” Najib as Prime Minister.
She said Muhyiddin’s statement about being briefed by the Attorney-General about criminal proof against Najib was an admission that there was “a high-level conspiracy to topple the Prime Minister, in what would have been a coup against the democratic process and the decision of the people at the last general election”.
One can dismiss such a silly and shallow understanding of a “conspiracy” and a “coup” to topple Najib as Prime Minister when the Attorney-General had proof of criminal wrongdoing by the Prime Minister, though such an accusation is still a surprise coming from a lawyer – as if Azalina would want the Attorney-General to seek audience with the Prime Minister to ask what he as Attorney-General should do with the evidence of the Prime Minister’s criminal wrongdoing, whether to suppress or how to suppress.
But the real sting in Azalina’s statement was at the end, where she asked:
“Why only now is Tan Sri Muhyiddin making such a confession, just after he was suspended as the Deputy President? What is his hidden motive and agenda? Can his act be seen as abetting since he claims to have information on an alleged criminal act, but did not report to the authorities until today?”
Is Azalina seriously suggesting that Muhyiddin should lodge a police report that when he was DPM, he had been informed by Gani Patai, the then Attorney-General, that Prime Minister Najib had committed a criminal act?
The next question that immediately follows is what guarantees the Police, the Attorney-General and other investigating agencies can give to Malaysians and the world that such a Muhyiddin report would be investigated professionally, efficiently and impartially, without “fear or favour”?
Or would a Special Prosecutor of unquestioned independence and credibility be appointed, together with a team of independent investigators empanelled to assist the Special Prosecutor, to carry out the investigations into Muhyiddin’s report?
In her statement, Azalina referred to a “charge sheet said to be drawn up in May 2015 – before the so-called Special Task Force was formed, before the investigation was started in June 2015”, presumably referring to the reported “charge sheet” to indict the Prime Minister of corruption wrongdoing with regard to the RM42 million SRC International scandal.
As far as I know, this is the first time information about “a charge sheet said to be drawn up in May 2015” had been made in the public domain.
Had Azalina received the necessary official clearance to declassify this information, or is she guilty of breach of the Official Secrets Act for firstly divulging in public information on this so-called “charge sheet said to be drawn up in May 2015”?
Reading Azalina’s statement, I cannot but wonder whether she is defending Najib or surreptitiously helping to defeat Najib as Prime Minister.
With such “friends”, Najib may not need “enemies”.