The Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, cannot remain silent or passive when Al Jazeera stands by its “Murder in Malaysia” documentary and Al Jazeera reporter, Australian-based Mary Ann Jolley calls for new probe by Malaysian police into fresh evidence into the horrific Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case.

A day after Al Jazeera Doha headquarters spokesperson said that the network stood by its 101 East current affairs programme “Murder in Malaysia” and denied any ulterior agenda apart from a “detailed and thorough report into a murder mystery that continues to have many unanswered questions” as well as reporting “new developments” relating to condemned convict Sirul Azhar Umar currently held in immigration detention centre in Sydney, Jolley has urged Malaysian police to investigate fresh evidence that she had uncovered and reported in the Altantuya Shaariibuu murder case amid a probe against her.

Jolley pointed out in a Malay Mail Online email interview that the text messages sent by former police commando Sirul – who was convicted together with Azila, another ex-police commando of killing the young Mongolian woman – to a man named Abdul Salam Ahmad on January 17 this year, in which he had asked for millions of dollars to “remain in Australia and not bring down the PM”, was not hearsay.

The first-hand account of a conversation between Sirul and his relative, in which Sirul alleged that Altantuya’s ex-lover Razak Baginda had shot her, was not hearsay either.

In these circumstances, how can Najib be silent or passive to the Al Jazeera offer of co-operation with any Malaysian police investigation that would look into the fresh evidence that came to light when filming “Murder in Malaysia” documentary?

In this connection, the earlier statement by the newly-appointed Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali that the Prime Minister was never implicated during the course of the trial over the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu, and that the murder trial was comprehensive with all relevant witnesses being called to testify, is not worth very much as a statement of exoneration for Najib to rely upon.

This is because even a layman without any legal training could retort that a person not implicated in a murder trial does not 100% preclude him from any involvement in the murder.
Nobody is suggesting that Najib is in any way involved in the Altantuya murder case but the crucial question is whether there had been a thorough police investigation into the Altantuya murder, and not just whether there had been a murder trial!

Furthermore, if there had been a thorough police investigation into the Altantuya murder case, why is it that there is such a gaping hole with regard to the motive for the Mongolian’s murder, as both Sirul and Azila, both convicted for her murder, had never known or met her before the heinous deed – raising the question as to why they would want to murder her unless there was a mastermind who would have the motive!

In this connection, can Apandi explain why there had been no appeal by the prosecution against the acquittal of Razak Baginda for abetting murder of Altantuya by the Shah Alam High Court in 2008?

Najib should act consistently with one who did not know or had ever met Altantuya and wanted to establish his total innocence in view of the swirling rumours inside and outside the country linking him in some manner to the murder, i.e. by ordering a full-scale investigation as establishing a Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Altantuya’s murder to remove beyond a shadow of doubt that he was in any manner or at any time involved, however remotely, in Altantunya’s murder.

Is Najib prepared to respond positively to the Al Jazeera documentary and Jolley’s call for new investigation into the fresh evidence she had uncovered?

[Speech (3) at the launching of the DAP “cerita-cerita kedai kopi” series at Donggongons, Sabah on Thursday, 17th Sept 2015 at 9 pm]