The attitude “case closed” with regard to Najib’s twin mega scandals must be debunked and demolished when Parliament reconvenes next Monday


UMNO leaders and operatives are now adopting the attitude of “case closed” with regard to Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s twin mega scandals. This attitude must be debunked and demolished when Parliament reconvenes next Monday.

Najib’s RM55 billion 1MDB and RM2.6 billion (or is it RM4.2 billion) “donation” twin mega scandals are not only NOT over and resolved, as Najib happily announced in his 2016 New Year Message, but they have become even bigger and more monstrous scandals with the expose of many new facets and angles, both inside and outside the country, in the past two months.

In fact, with Najib’s twin mega scandals now increasingly intertwined, one question foremost in the minds of concerned and patriotic Malaysians is whether the RM55 billion 1MDB scandal and the RM2.6 billion (now mushroomed to RM4.2 billion) “donation” scandal are actually part of one big monstrous financial scandal.

UMNO leaders and operatives might have thought that the new Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamad Apandi Ali’s “exculpation” of Najib of any corruption or criminal wrongdoing would be the final word on the Najib mega scandals, but the revelation by former Deputy Prime Minister, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin that he had been briefed by the then Attorney-General Tan Sri Gani Patail about Najib’s corruption and criminal act in the RM42 million SRC International scandal before his sacking as Deputy Prime Minister on 28th July 2015 had completely changed the picture by re-opening a can of worms in the very bosom of the Najib administration.

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said, had foolishly corroborated in the re-opening of the twin mega scandals when she divulged that the Attorney-General’s Chambers had drafted a charge sheet against Najib for corruption as far back as May last year – an information which had never been disclosed in the public domain until Azalina’s statement.

In the circumstances, how can UMNO leaders and operatives, in particular Ministers, keep up the pretence of “case closed” when Parliament reconvenes and Najib’s twin mega scandals return as the top items of the parliamentary agenda?

Following Muhyiddin and Azalina’s revelations about the former Attorney-General’s briefing to the then Deputy Prime Minister about Prime Minister Najib’s corruption wrongdoing and that the charge sheet on corruption against Najib had gone as far back as May last year, the only right and proper thing for a honest, responsible and trustworthy government to do is to commission an independent Royal Commission of Inquiry into Najib’s twin mega scandals and ascertain what had transpired during the course of inquiry into the scandals, in particular the cause in the sudden appearance and sudden disappearance of the Special Task Force on the twin mega scandals.

With a “cari makan” character for the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) Chairman in the person of Datuk Hasan Arifin, nobody has much confidence that the PAC would be able to play any positive role in getting to the root of the twin mega scandals.

Hasan has said that the PAC would meet tomorrow and on Monday for the Auditor-General to present his final audit report on the 1MDB.

He has conspicuously avoided my question whether he has received assurance that there would be 100% attendance of PAC members at the PAC meetings tomorrow and on Monday, for this was the reason why he had unilaterally and arbitrarily postponed the PAC meetings scheduled for Feb. 24 and 25.

How could Hasan reconcile with the reasons for his unilateral and arbitrary postponement of PAC meetings on Feb. 24 and 25 on the ground that there would be no 100% attendance if he cannot state that he had been assured of 100% PAC attendance tomorrow and on Monday?

Furthermore, Hasan owes a responsibility to Parliament and the nation to disclose who were the PAC members who went overseas causing the sabotage of the PAC meetings of Feb. 24 and 25, and what disciplinary actions would be taken against such errant MPs who had clearly breached parliamentary privileges for such miscreant parliamentary conduct.

Print Friendly

  1. No comments yet.

You must be logged in to post a comment.