Good questions, Dzukifli – MACC must not only resist Najib hiving off SPRM to Paul Low, it must demand MACC comes directly under an Opposition-headed Parliamentary Committee to ensure its independence and professionalism
“Who are you to control us, MACC boss gives Low a blow” is the Malaysiakini headline for a Penang-datelined report of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Dzulkifli Ahmad hitting out at Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Paul Llow for his proposal for a new Department of National Integrity and Good Governance (JITN) to monitor MACC and ensure that it properly investigate corruption cases and charges perpetrators effectively.
Dzukifli fumed and said: “We are supposed to be independent. If the excuse of forming the JITN is to monitor MACC, why should I report to him?”
He then asked:
"Who is this minister? Who is the minister to control how we investigate cases?”
Good questions, Dzulifli. MACC must not only resist the Prime Minister hiving off MACC to Paul Low’s JITN so that he does not have to personally direct the “dirty work” of directing the MACC, MACC must demand that it comes directly under an Opposition-headed Parliamentary Committee to ensure its independence and professionalism.
MACC is “supposed” to be independent, but it is not. It will be even less “independent” when it is hived off to Paul Low under JITN!
The 1MDB scandal is the worst blot on the independence and professionalism of the MACC.
The three FAQs on 1MDB scandal are:
- Whether Najib received RM2.6 billion donation from Saudi royalty;
- Whether Najib returned RM2.1 billion to Saudi royalty; and
- Whether the RM144 million pink diamond necklace for the “wife of MO1” came from stolen 1MDB funds.
The answers to all these three FAQs about the 1MDB scandal are available in great detail in the US DOJ’s largest kleptocratic litigation to forfeit US$1.7 billion 1MDB-linked assets in the United States, United Kingdom and Switzerland.
The answers to the three FAQs are: (1) Najib never received RM2.6 billion donation from Saudi royalty, although he received other donations from Saudi sources. The monies came from 1MDB funds. (2) Najib never returned the RM2.1 billion to Saudi royalty, as the money did not come from Saudi sources, but were returned to Tanore account in Singapore and were from stolen 1MDB funds. (3) The RM2.1 billion returned to Tanore account in Singapore was used to buy, among other things, the RM144 million pink diamond necklace for the “wife of MO1”.
These details all to be found in the 10 “killer” paragraphs in the US DOJ kleptocratic litigation - Paragraph 339 to 348 under the section “$681 MILLION WAS TRANSFERRED FROM THE TANORE ACCOUNT TO AN ACCOUNT BELONGING TO MALAYSIAN OFFICIAL 1”.
Why had the MACC and the Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamad Apandi Ali cleared Najib of any wrongdoing with regard to the 1MDB scandal?
In view of the US DOJ kleptocratic litigation and all the evidence in these 10 “killer” paragraphs in the US DOJ litigation, are Dzulkifli and Apandi going to re-open investigations into the 1MDB case?
Malaysians do not expect Dzulkifli and Apandi to re-open investigations into the 1MDB scandal, as this can only be done if there is a new Pakatan Harapan Federal Government in Putrajaya after the 14th General Election, when MACC will be responsible directly to a Parliamentary Committee and not to Najib or Paul Low.