Is Najib’s statement on Sirul’s claim that he acted under orders exculpatory or incriminating?

The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, has made a most rash and imprudent outburst at the MCA Chinese New Year open house today, when he said that former police commando Sirul Azhar Umar’s claim that he acted under orders to murder Altantuya Shaariibuu was “utter rubbish” and “total rubbish”.

Was the Prime Minister’s outburst exculpatory or incriminating?

It would be exculpatory if he is asserting that Sirul was talking “utter” or “total rubbish” that he murdered the Altantuya in 2006 together with Chief Inspector Azila Hadri under orders as there were no such orders to the two former police commandos to murder Altantuya.

The question that immediately arises is how Najib knows that the two convicted police commandos had not received any such orders from their superior to kill Altantunya and destroy evidence by blowing up her body using C4 explosives?

He can say there was no such “order” from him, but how could he say that there were no such “order” from other people? How can he be so sure?

Since he is also implicated in the allegations flying around both inside the country and worldwide in the murder of Altantuya, isn’t the best way to resolve the riddle is to have a thorough, comprehensive and independent (even international) investigation into the Altantuya’s murder?

That Sirul and Azila had murdered Altantunya and blow up her body by using C4 explosive is virtually admitted by Sirul when he as good as made a confession from Australia, saying: “If I die today, I would not find peace. I did what I was told and this is what I get in return.”
So Najib’s outburst this morning cannot be exculpatory, in destroying beyond a shadow of doubt the theory that Sirul and Azila had killed Altantuya and destroy evidence by blowing up her body with C4 explosives “under order” – especially as this tallied with Sirul’s first police statement dated 9th November 2006.

But Najib’s outburst could be self-incriminating implying that he knew the circumstances leading to the murder of Altantuya by two police commandos acting “under order”.

Would Najib agree that it is a gross miscarriage of justice if Sirul and Azila are sent to the gallows while the mastermind of Altantuya’s murder who had the motive to kill her and destroy evidence by blowing up her body with C4 explosives is allowed to get away scot-free.

Is the Prime Minister’s stand dismissing Sirul’s claim that he had acted under order to kill Altantuya the reason why the Inspector-General of Police, Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar is so obstinate in refusing to re-open investigations in Altantuya’s murder?

I call on Najib to be in the forefront to institute a thorough, comprehensive, independent (even international) investigation into Altantuya’s murder, and to announce a reprieve of the death sentences for Sirul and Azila until the outcome of such investigations.

  1. #1 by boh-liao on Thursday, 19 February 2015 - 4:21 pm

    “but how could he say that there were no such “order” from other people? How can he be so sure?”
    Y NOT?
    He is d peeM mah n it’s his job 2 know EVERYTHING under d sun in 1M’sia
    此地无银三百两, AhCheatKor不曾order, veri sure 1

  2. #3 by Bigjoe on Thursday, 19 February 2015 - 4:28 pm

    I tell you its worst than anyone has yet to say it. Think WHO could or would Najib be so sure of? His aide? His brother mentioned by Bala? the IGP? No way. There is only one person – the person he lets use govt staff to do her shopping, the person who can use govt jets as she pleases, the person he trust so much he would listen to people close to her to make a precarious RM50b private hedge fund that nearly broke the country’s rating..

    Think about it..

  3. #4 by boh-liao on Thursday, 19 February 2015 - 5:29 pm

    SAME like NO ORDER 2 our immigration office 2 delete AS’s entry record
    Just plain initiative of an immigration officer who did NOT act under orders

  4. #5 by boh-liao on Thursday, 19 February 2015 - 5:31 pm

    Same same, Sarawak Chief Minister also acted NOT under orders

    Going against UmnoB’s n Perkosa’s definition of pendatang

You must be logged in to post a comment.