BALA'S AFFIDAVIT TO THE MACC

Only courageous whistleblowers can save Malaysia now!

AFFIDAVIT

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal, (NRIC NO: 600928-08-6235) a Malaysian citizen of full age and of No. 32, Jalan Pelangi 1, Taman Pelangi, Rawang, 48000, Selangor, Malaysia, do solemnly and sincerely affirm and state as follows:

1. I am a private investigator by profession. I was born in Malaysia on the 28.09.1960 and am married to A. Santamil Selvi Alau Malay. I have 3 children, Kishen, born on the 07.02.1997, Menaga, born on the 22.08.1998 and Reeshi, born on the 04.02.2002. I can be contacted through my lawyer Mr. Americk Sidhu.

2. On the 05.07.2010, my lawyer received couriered documents from the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC), which were sent to his hotel in London, setting out a series of questions they wished me to answer in relation to their investigations into an offence connected to report No: IPA 0350/2009.

3. These questions are now answered in the order they have been set out in the request from the MACC dated the 1st July 2010 which is annexed hereto marked as Exhibit ‘PIB-1’.

Question 2 : 1st Statutory Declaration (SD) dated 1st July 2008

2.1 Answer

The 1st SD is about the relationships between Abdul Razak Baginda, Najib Tun Razak and Altantuya Sharibuu and the circumstances in which I found myself involved in a series of events prior to the murder of Altantuya.

The circumstances which led me to make this 1st SD can be summarized by saying that I felt it was my moral duty as a law abiding citizen, to bring to the attention of the authorities the cover ups I felt were being orchestrated by the police investigation team in cohorts [sic] with the Attorney Generals Chambers in this case which appeared to me to have been designed to protect the real perpetrators and organizers behind this murder.


I was present at the front gates of Razak Baginda’s residence in Damansara Heights, Kuala Lumpur in the evening of the 19.10.2006 when Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri, Corporal Sirul Azahar and Lance Corporal Rohaniza drove up in a red Proton Aeroback and took Altantuya away. I believe these 2 gentlemen were the bodyguards of Najib Razak.

I also noticed around the same time that another blue proton car, driven by a Malay man, passed by very slowly. This driver appeared to be studying the scene outside Razak Baginda’s house very carefully.

I have since identified this Malay man as one Nasir Safar (left), another close confidant of Najib Razak and his personal assistant.

I was again on duty outside Razak Baginda’s house in the evening of the 22.10.2006 when 3 of Altantuya’s girlfriends and their private investigator, Mr. Ang, turned up looking for her. They were causing a commotion so I called the police. An Inspector from the Dang Wangi police station turned up in a patrol car.

It was at this stage I received a call on my handphone from one Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC to Najib Razak. Musa Safri asked me to pass my handphone to the Inspector from the Dang Wangi police station who persuaded these girls to disperse.

It was Razak Baginda who had given Musa Safri my handphone number.

I had informed the police of these circumstances when they were recording s.112 statements from me during their investigations into this murder.

In total, I have given the police 5 statements in relation to their investigations, the details of which are as follows:

I. Statement recorded by DSP Gan Tack Guan of the D9 Serious Crimes department from the 01.11.2006 extending for about 3 months with questioning taking place on average twice a week. No deletion of references to Najib Tun Razak.

II. Statement recorded by a Malay lady ASP at the D7 Vice department on one occasion in November 2006. No deletion of references to Najib Tun Razak.

III. Statement recorded by the D6 intelligence division at police headquarters, Bukit Aman beginning the day after Razak Baginda was charged in court, continuously for 7 days while I was under remand. This is the statement in which all references to Najib Tun Razak were removed before I signed it.

IV. Statement recorded by the Child Protection Unit at Jalan Duta the day after I was released from remand at Bukit Aman. There was no deletion of Najib Tun Razak’s name from this statement because it was audio recorded.

V. Statement recorded at D9 division by DSP Gan Tack Guan in January or February 2007. This statement is the one in which DPP Salehuddin was doing the questioning over the phone and DSP Gan recorded my answers. This was just before the trial began.

I was never asked any question relating to the involvement of Najib Tun Razak in this matter when I was summoned to give evidence for the prosecution in court.

I was therefore concerned that the police and the prosecution were trying to protect and cover up the involvement of persons very closely connected to Najib Tun Razak. I believe the police recorded a statement from Musa Safri but this gentleman was never called as a witness in court and neither was Najib Tun Razak.


I felt it was necessary for the public to know exactly who the personalities involved in this murder were and that further investigations should have been pursued to discover the motive behind the killing of an innocent foreign national.

This is why I made that 1st SD.

2.2 Answer

I first made this SD at my lawyers office in Kuala Lumpur. I began narrating my experience to my lawyer sometime in early May 2008 over a period of about 2 months before it was completed.

2.3 Answer

The reason why I made this SD has been summarized in the answer given to question 2.1 above. My lawyer drafted this 1st SD based on my statements, information and knowledge of the events set out therein and narrated to him.

2.4 Answer

No one ‘instructed’ me to make this SD. I made it of my own free will without influence from any other party. The only other person involved in preparing the 1st SD was my lawyer Mr. Americk Sidhu. He was able to decipher my narration of the relevant events and to produce a legally coherent document on my behalf. My lawyer had no interests in assisting me. I had previously tried to find a lawyer to assist me but none seem prepared to do so.

2.5 Answer

My lawyer drafted this 1st SD.

Yes, all the matters stated in my 1st SD were within my personal knowledge.

I have been advised by my lawyers and verily believe that legally and technically speaking everything I have sworn to in my 1st SD that had been told to me by Abdul Razak Baginda and Altantuya as coming from some other person could be classified as hearsay as to the truth of such 3rd party statement but not as to the fact that either Abdul Razak Baginda or Altantuya repeated it to me.

The rest of the contents of my 1st SD is not hearsay.

2.6 Answer

As far as I am concerned there is nothing in my 1st SD which could be categorized as an untruth.

2.7 Answer

I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda in my capacity as a Private Investigator. Our relationship would therefore be one of an employer/employee.

Yes, I had met Abdul Razak Baginda before I signed my 1st SD. I had met him on a number of occasions during the course of my employment but I cannot remember the exact number of times we came face to face.

When I first met Razak Baginda at his office at Wisma Getah Asli, he explained to me what had been happening as far as the harassment he was receiving from Altantuya was concerned and the purpose of my employment.

I had enquired from him as to why he had not reported the matter to the police. He told me he could not have the police involved as this may have jeopardize the position of a VIP who was also involved in his problem with Altantuya. Razak Baginda never mentioned who this VIP was at that stage.

I only discovered that the VIP he had been referring to throughout my employment with him was Najib Tun Razak. This was at the office of Razak Baginda’s lawyer on the morning of his arrest.

This occurred when Razak Baginda received an sms on his handphone while seated with me in front of his lawyer. He showed us both this message which read …” I am seeing the IGP at 11.00 am today….matter will be solved….be cool”.

Razak Baginda then admitted the VIP he had been referring to all along was Najib and the sms he had just received was from him.

2.8 Answer

I met Abdul Razak Baginda because he wanted a Private Investigator to keep Altantuya from harassing him and his family. Razak Baginda’s lawyer by the name of Dhirren Norendra advised Razak Baginda to contact me. I think Dhirren had seen my advert in the Bar Council magazine.

2.9 Answer

I met Razak Baginda at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang, Kuala Lumpur.

2.10 and 2.11 Answers

Please refer to paragraphs 3 to 24 of my 1st SD. The required explanations are succinctly set out in these paragraphs. A copy of my 1st SD is annexed hereto marked as Exhibit ‘PIB-2’.

2.12 Answer

I was not forced to sign the 1st SD. I was also not under any form of duress when I did so. I signed this SD completely voluntarily. My lawyer had prepared it on my instructions.

2.13 Answer

I was not offered any money by any party to affirm my 1st SD.

The subsequent questions nos. 2.14 to 2.16 are therefore irrelevant.

Question 3 : 2nd Statutory Declaration (SD) dated 4th July 2008

The answers to questions 3.1 to 3.19 are set out in the Q&A’s Parts 1, 2 & 3, prepared by my lawyers in October 2009 and which are annexed hereto as Exhibits’ PIB-3’, ‘PIB-4’ and ‘PIB-5’. Detailed explanations are provided in respect of all the questions posed under this head.

Question 4 : Other relevant matters

4.1 Answer

I have received more than 4 cheques from Deepak Jaikishan amounting to more than RM200,000.00. In fact Deepak has paid me a total of approximately RM750,000.00 over the space of about 1 year, from July 2008 to July 2009.

4.2 Answer

The reason why Deepak gave me these cheques is explained in detail in exhibits ‘PIB-3’, ‘PIB-4’ and ‘PIB-5’.

4.3, 4.4, 4.5, 4.6, 4.7 Answers

Deepak handed over the cheques to ASP Suresh who in turn handed them to a friend of mine. These cheques were then paid into my friend’s bank account in KL and the funds forwarded by telegraphic transfer to India. This was possible because Deepak left the payee blank. Alternatively, if the cheques were for cash, the funds were also forwarded to me in India by my friends after they were cashed.

Deepak also made payments into my wife’s bank account with the EON Bank in Kuala Lumpur from time to time.

Copies of my wife’s bank statements with the EON Bank showing substantial deposits and a dishonoured cheque from a company called ‘Mekar Dayabumi Sdn Bhd’ are annexed hereto collectively marked as Exhibit ‘PIB-6’.

I did not need to seek clarification from anyone regarding these cheques as I understood what they were for.

Annexed to this affidavit are copies of cheques I received from Deepak Jaikishan and Carpet Raya Sdn Bhd respectively:

Cheque No. 014554 dated 18.12.2008 in the sum of RM50,000.00 ( Exhibit ‘PIB-7’)

Cheque No. 014555 dated 22.12.2008 in the sum of RM50,000.00 (Exhibit ‘PIB-8’)

Cheque No. 014556 dated 26.12.2008 in the sum of RM50,000.00 (Exhibit ‘PIB-9’)

Cheque No. 014557 dated 31.12.2008 in the sum of RM50,000.00 (Exhibit ‘PIB-10’)

Cheque No. 014558 dated 18.01.2009 in the sum of RM50,000.00 (Exhibit ‘PIB-11’)

Cheque No. 564331 dated 31.03.2009 in the sum of RM50,000.00 (Exhibit ‘PIB-12’)

4.8 Answer

The reason why I decided to disclose the events and circumstances of this case is again clearly set out in detail in exhibits ‘PIB-3’, ‘PIB-4’ and ‘PIB-5’.

4. All of the answers to the questions posed above and as set out in ‘PIB-1’ are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and are provided based on my own knowledge and belief and I further hereby confirm that no party whatsoever has influenced any of my answers.

[Source: Malaysia Today]

Background reading: Najib, Rosmah, Baginda, Nazim mentioned in Bala's French probe

Two good reads from Free Malaysia Today...

BN shows how bankrupt it is of strategies

The lacklustre Hobson’s choice premier Mohammed Najib Tun Abdul Razak, who has been struggling to be taken seriously and continues to struggle mostly, in vain, to try and restore the dwindling fortunes of his party, is behaving like a rabbit caught in the headlights of a fast approaching vehicle.

[Read the rest here.]


Bad omens and political quakes

The year of the Tiger, according to Chinese soothsayers, does not augur well for the premier, who was born on July 23, 1953, the year of the snake. Astrologers say the Snake and the Tiger aren’t pals. For the snake the “DNA for 2010 is poor people relations, poor health and poor luck.” The Tiger of 2010 is “the year to trigger any possible unfortunate event.”

[Read the rest here.]

BLOOD ON THEIR HANDS

Asia Sentinel | Monday, 26 October 2009

It's best to be connected to the ruling national coalition

On July 16, according to the testimony of a Thai pathologist, Teoh Beng Hock, a 29-year-old aide to an opposition politician, was probably beaten during a marathon questioning session, sodomized, strangled unconscious, dragged to a window of the Malaysia Anti-Corruption Commission in Kuala Lumpur and thrown to his death.

The country's law enforcement establishment maintains that Teoh committed suicide by leaping from the MACC building after the inquiry was concluded into irregularities in his boss's accounts. But it is far from the first "suicide" in custody and what happened to Teoh happens all too frequently when the luckless collide with the powerful in Malaysia. His real killers are unlikely ever to be identified. As many as 350 people have died in custody since 1990. The privileged are rarely brought to trial.

The most infamous recent case before Teoh's is that of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a 28 year-old Mongolian translator who was murdered in 2006 by two bodyguards of then-Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak. Altantuya had been jilted by Najib's best friend, Abdul Razak Baginda, and was demanding money from him.

Although numerous witnesses and evidence connected Najib to the affair, he was never questioned or put on the witness stand, nor was his chief of staff, Musa Safri, who Baginda said in a cautioned statement he approached about getting Altantuya to cease her harassment. His two bodyguards were convicted of the murder although one, in his confession, said the two men were to be paid RM100,000 to kill her. The court never asked who would pay the money. The confession wasn't allowed in court. Baginda was acquitted without having to put on a defense and promptly left the country and Najib was eventually named Prime Minister.

Such questionable cases go back to at least the early 1980s when Sultan Mahmud Iskandar of Johor (left) was dubbed the "killer king" by the British tabloids after he shot a trespasser to death on his property. He also reportedly assaulted and killed a golf caddy who was said to have laughed when the sultan missed a golf stroke and he maimed the caddy's brother. He later was alleged to have assaulted and injured a hockey coach, kicking off a constitutional crisis that led to former Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad's removal of legal immunity from prosecution for all of Malaysia's nine sultans, although Iskandar was never either arrested or jailed.

There are plenty more. In 1988 an attractive young woman named Mustakizah Jaafar, who owned a video rental business in Malacca, was found hacked to death by unknown assailants. Mustakizah reportedly was pregnant at the time of her death. She was believed to be having an affair with Megat Junid Megat Ayob (right), the onetime UMNO deputy home affairs minister, who died in January 2008 of cancer.

No one was ever charged with Mutakizah's murder. The widespread gossip about Megat Junid's connection with Mustakizah didn't do his political career any harm. He was ultimately named Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Minister in 1997 although he lost his parliamentary seat two years later and retired from politics.

[Read the whole sad and sordid story here.]

One more reason why Malaysia Today is under severe attack!

Since Malaysia Today published leaked cabinet memos on 17 September revealing that the finance ministry had sought the BN government's approval and endorsement of the RM12.5 billion Port Klang Free Zone scam, knowing full well it was exposing future generations of Malaysians to colossal debt, the popular news portal founded by RPK has been under massive attack by paid hackers. On Sunday, 27 September, RPK released yet another explosive document that only served to provoke intensified attacks against MT. I managed to save the text and one image from MT before the site became inaccesssible. The least I can do in the face of such dirty tactics is to reproduce RPK's post for those who have yet to read it...

Another case under the OSA for the IGP to NFA

Two army officers were in the home of the then Deputy Prime Minister for about eight hours during the time Altantuya was supposed to have been murdered. Why they were there during those eight hours and who these two army officers are has not been revealed...

Raja Petra Kamarudin

The Malaysian government says Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered between 10.00pm on October 19th and 1.00am on October 20th, 2006. That was the charge against Chief Inspector Azilah Hadri and Corporal Sirul Azhar Umar and that was what they were pronounced guilty of.

At 10.01pm on 19th October 2006, two unnamed army officers went to Najib Tun Razak’s house, according to log entry 6494 in the police guard book. (see scanned images of log 1a and log 2a below). These same two unnamed army officers left Najib’s house at 6.05am on 20th October 2006, according to log entry 6498 (see images of log 1b and log 2b below).

The purpose of the visit was never clarified.

This means these two army officers were in the home of the then Deputy Prime Minister for about eight hours during the time Altantuya was supposed to have been murdered. Why they were there during those eight hours and who these two army officers are has not been revealed.

From 10.01pm the night Altantuya was murdered until 6.05am the following morning, two army officers visited the Deputy Prime Minister and/or his wife. This is certainly a most odd time to visit a Deputy Prime Minister and/or his wife in their home. And what does one do for eight hours in someone’s home during the time most people would be fast sleep?

According to Fauzi, a driver, Rosmah Mansor left the official residence of the Deputy Prime Minister in Putrajaya at 6.48am on 19th October 2006 using car registration number WLQ 11 to return to her private home in Taman Duta. The car odometer reading was 86,197. That same evening, Rosmah attended a function near the Tabung Haji building in Jalan Tun Razak in Kuala Lumpur

She did not return home until 11.20pm later that night, according to Fauzi.

The next day, 20th October 2006, Rosmah left her official residence in Putrajaya at 6.32am using the same car bearing registration number WLQ 11 to, again, return to Taman Duta. She also ran a few errands and did not return to Putrajaya until 1.01am the following morning.

The odometer reading was 86,315.

On the third day, Rosmah repeated the itinerary. She left Putrajaya at 6.40am to return to her Taman Duta home and to run some errands and did not go back to Putrajaya until 9.34pm that night. The odometer reading was 86,550.

Over three days, Rosmah travelled more than 350 kilometres to shuttle from Putrajajaya to Taman Duta, plus to some other places in between, according to the records.

I suggest the IGP investigate how these 'officials secrets' managed to leak out and whether the Official Secrets Act (OSA) has been breached. Or maybe the IGP would rather bury the whole issue and file it under No Further Action (NFA) to save the Prime Minister and his wife from having to answer some very embarrassing questions.

Hmm... I wonder who these two unnamed army officers are and whether they were really at the Deputy Prime Minister's house those entire eight hours or whether they sneaked out and in again without any 'official record'.

Ooh, I just love the OSA that protects the wrongdoer and instead sends the whistleblower to jail.

Log 1a

Log 2a

Log 1b

Log 2b

To enlarge click on images

"The rakyat has lost faith in the BN."

Malaysiakini readers respond to Najib's announcement of a Royal Commission of Inquiry on MACC interrogation methods and a Court Inquest into the "sudden death" of Teoh Beng Hock...

What is the PM's role in this 'witch-hunt'?
July 24, 09 12:56pm

On Cabinet approves royal commission:

GH Kok: The cabinet has finally agreed to set up the royal commission of inquiry. However, as I have expected, the terms of reference of the commission falls far short of what is needed.

As reported in the media, the royal commission is to "look into the MACC's investigative procedures and to determine if there were any human rights violations when Teoh was being interrogated." Well, this is the very least that the royal commission should do but this is surely not enough!

We want to know who gave the instruction to the MACC to launch a witch-hunt against the Selangor Pakatan Rakyat government that triggered a chain of events that led to the torture and death of Teoh Beng Hock.

We know that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission reports directly to Prime Minister Najib. We want to know what role the prime minister played in this witch-hunt.

We want the head of MACC to take the stand and answer these questions: who instructed him to start hounding the seven Pakatan Rakyat Aduns (state reps)? What instructions did they give him? What did they ask him to do? What did they ask him to find or fabricate as the case may be? What compelled him to order his officers to raid the Aduns service centres, take away files from the district offices, pull up mosque officials in Puchong for questioning, interrogate for eight hours a Kajang municipal councillor, interrogate an Adun's assistant for four hours, and finally cause the death of a courageous young man?

We, the people, want to know the truth. We want to hold the person, at the top of the chain of command, fully responsible for this entire witch-hunt. If it is necessary in order for us to get to the top person responsible, we should offer some immunity to those at the bottom who willingly provide us with the information.

The offer is open. It will not be over until it's over ... royal commission or not!

Richard Teo: Umno's exit from the seat of power has been expedited. This will be BN's last walk in the corridors of power. The events of the last few days have taken a pivotal turn and Najib could be the shortest-term Umno president to be the prime minister of Malaysia. Thanks to MACC which made all this possible. The groundswell of anger and bitterness at the institution which acted in a manner to topple the Pakatan Rakyat government was overwhelming.

People who have unwaveringly supported the BN government have now decided at last that we need a change in order to reform. It has become obvious that BN's 50 years of being in the government has corrupted all the institutions which form the pillars of a democratic nation.

Finally, the act that MACC did was an act that will finally nail the coffin of the BN. The only way BN can reform is to exit from the seat of power and to spend sometime to reflect on its past mistakes. And with some wisdom and past experience, maybe it can make a comeback at some later date. Farewell BN. We expected you to go after March 8, but we didn't expect it to be so soon.

A Concerned Malaysian: I think the people of Malaysia want JUSTICE to be done to be done for the late Teoh Beng Hock and not a mockery.

I seriously hope that the government will re-examine the royal commission's terms of reference. Although we may have not known Teoh but as a human person who has feelings, we feel very much for what has happened. People all around are very angry and unhappy with what is happening in Malaysia not just in Teoh's case but also in the case of Kugan where justice was not done.

The rakyat has lost faith in the BN. We hope that all those who have been responsible in the death of Teoh will be brought to justice.

JR Lee: Most Malaysians waited patiently for the cabinet to announce the setting up a royal commission to investigate, inter-alia, the death of Teoh Beng Hock. But we were shocked when the cabinet announced that the death of Teoh will not be investigated by the royal commission but only by an inquest headed by a magistrate, a very much lower authority.

Why the discrepancy? Why Teoh's death is not investigated by the royal commission? This is typical of a conspiracy to cover-up. It is definitely against the 1Malaysia principle of 'People First, Performance Now' promulgated by the PM.

It is blatantly clear that it is not 'People First' as Malaysians seeking for the truth wants Teoh's death investigated by the royal commission and the cabinet is also not performing what Malaysians expecting them to do.

The PM is not walking the talk, he is talking more of his walk and expect all Malaysian to believe him!

Bear in mind that Teoh was only a witness to an alleged crime and he lost his life in the hands of MACC. Just imagine if he was a suspect to an alleged crime.

Adcin: The royal commission announced by Najib may on the surface of it look like a smart move by our leader. It buys time for the government and it hopes that the public will move on and pass it all off as some unfortunate accident, when the anger subsides.

The experience of the royal commission on the Lingam tapes must have given heart to them. Except for some jokes at Lingam's expense and a ring tone composed in his honour, absolutely nothing of substance was ultimately achieved.

However they did not realise that they lost a lot of public confidence and in the end votes in the general election.

There will be no jokes this time for Teoh's commission, and the longer it drags on, the worse the effect will be on the government. There are no points that can be won or made for the MACC and their masters. The royal commission may buy some time and even protect some parties, but in reality it is a slow death for Najib and his BN.

We should be happy because all it needed was for Najib to cut to the chase, apprehend and castigate the offenders and revamp the MACC to be more accountable and transparent.

Noose Tightening Around Najib's Fat Neck

Why the hurry when it comes to Raja Petra? Is the unholy haste more about Najib than Raja Petra? Are they hoping that what will be revealed during Raja Petra’s trial will turn out to be the noose around Najib’s fat neck?

NO SUCH THING AS A SURE THING

by The Pink Panther

They say justice delayed is justice denied. But who says the wheels of justice always move slowly? Justice can sometimes move extremely fast when they want it to - especially when the court case involves Raja Petra Kamarudin - and when it relates to the Altantuya murder.

Raja Petra’s lawyer had not yet walked into his office after their court appearance at the Jalan Duta Court Complex this morning when a fax was waiting for him on his table. And even before he could digest the contents of the fax another fax came in. The Shah Alam High Court will hear the appeal by the Prosecution at 2.45pm tomorrow, Friday, 5 December 2008. So Raja Petra will, again, be in court - tomorrow (5 December) 2.45pm at the Shah Alam court.

This morning, Raja Petra and his lawyers were in court to confirm the date of the appeal on the criminal defamation case. Yesterday, by order of the court, these same lawyers spent eight hours at Bukit Aman for a forensic test on the computers the police confiscated from his house related to the sedition case. And tomorrow is the Prosecution’s appeal on the amendment of the charge on the sedition case.

Wow! Seldom have Malaysians seen the courts move so fast. There are so many court cases going on at the same time that it is beginning to become very difficult to keep track of who is the defender and who is the defendee, and who is the appealer and who is the appealee.

The issues before the various courts are as follows - the Shah Alam court, the Petaling Jaya court and the Kuala Lumpur court. The prosecution tried to amend the charge in Raja Petra’s sedition case in the Petaling Jaya court but the judge turned it down. So the prosecution is appealing the judge’s decision in the Shah Alam court. And that is going to be heard tomorrow at 2.45pm.

Then, the prosecution is not happy that they did not find the evidence of any crime in the two computers the police confiscated - meaning a copy of the article ‘Let’s send the Altantuya murderers to hell.’ So they asked the Petaling Jaya court for permission to check both computers again in the hope that this time they might find something. They checked the first computer over eight hours in Bukit Aman yesterday and will do a forensic test on the second unit next Tuesday.

Then, Raja Petra’s lawyers are appealing against the decision to transfer the criminal defamation case from the Kuala Lumpur Magistrates Court to the Sessions Court and this appeal was slotted for mention this morning in the Kuala Lumpur High Court. The court ordered Raja Petra’s lawyers to file their submission on 12 December 2008 and for the Prosecution to reply to it on 19 December. The hearing will be on 20 January 2009 when the judge will probably deliver his judgment as to whether the case will be heard in the Sessions Court (as what the Prosecution wants) or whether it has to be sent back to the Magistrates Court (as what Raja Petra wants).


In the meantime, while the Shah Alam and Petaling Jaya and Kuala Lumpur courts hear the various appeals and counter-appeals and applications to amend the charge and applications to oppose the amendment to the charge and application to do a second forensic on the two computers and so on and so forth, the hearings related to the crimes Raja Petra has been alleged to have committed are being delayed even further. And this has upset those who walk in the corridors of power.

The Prosecution has been told to wrap up all these many cases as soon as possible, preferably way before March 2009. March 2009 is when Najib Tun Razak is supposed to take over from Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as Prime Minister of Malaysia. Abdullah wants these cases settled fast but Najib would rather they drag on until way past March 2009.

Abdullah wants all the cases settled now in the hope that damaging evidence will surface during the trial, which will implicate Najib, or at least his wife, in the murder of Altantuya. If this happens, this will disqualify Najib from taking over as Prime Minister. Najib, however, wants things to remain as they are until he takes over so that, when he is already Prime Minister, he can sweep everything under the carpet and suffer no damage.

How he is going to sweep everything under the carpet will be a bridge he crosses when he comes to it. Dropping the charges would be one way or making sure the judge shouts ‘irrelevant’ every five minutes could probably work as well, as it did in Anwar Ibrahim’s trial in 1998-1999.

Raja Petra never dreamt how important his trials were going to be in deciding who would become the Prime Minister of Malaysia come March 2009. Everyone assumed that Najib would automatically be taking over from Abdullah at the ‘agreed’ time. But it appears like nothing has really been agreed yet. And this is troubling Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad as well who is banking on Najib taking over in March 2009 as planned.

However, according to Murphy’s Law, what can go wrong will go wrong. And the plan for Najib taking over from Abdullah in March 2009 can certainly go wrong. So Abdullah wants to see to it that it will definitely go wrong.

And Mahathir is fully aware of this and he is already lamenting about it even before the plan can be put in place. Call it a preemptive strike if you wish and Mahathir is the master of preemption, amongst other things. So he is preempting Abdullah’s move to block Najib from taking over as Prime Minister in March 2009.

Mahathir realises that you need not be the Umno President to become Prime Minister. Tun Abdul Razak Hussein became Prime Minister without becoming the Umno President, till much later. Mahathir himself stayed on as Prime Minister in 1988 even though be had no party (when Umno closed down) and was an independent Member of Parliament (calun bebas) while Ling Liong Sik was the Barisan Nasional Chairman at that time. In fact, Ghafar Baba became Deputy Prime Minister in 1986 without ever becoming an Umno (Lama) member until Umno Baru was formed in 1988.

Yes, who says you must first become the Umno President or the Barisan Nasional Chairman to become Prime Minister of Malaysia. All the Constitution says is that you must be a Member of Parliament whom, in the opinion of the Agong, commands the confidence of the majority of the Members of the House - in other words, the 222 Members of Parliament.

Let’s say Anwar Ibrahim has the confidence of the 82 Pakatan Rakyat Members of Parliament. This leaves another 140 who are not with Anwar. Then, say, Abdullah has half the 140 with him, meaning 70. This leaves another 70. Let’s also say 20 abstain. This leaves 50. And, say, these 50 are with Najib.

In this case, Anwar Ibrahim has the confidence of the majority because he has 82, Abdullah has only 70, Najib 50, while 20 are ‘sitting on the fence’ and are not supporting any side.

It must be noted that Umno has only 66 Members of Parliament in Peninsular Malaysia. Even if the 13 Umno Sabah Members of Parliament stay united that would come to only 79. Pakatan Rakyat still has more at 82. Abdullah is said to control at least 20 Umno Members of Parliament. So Najib will be reduced to 59 against Pakatan Rakyat’s 82. The question would be: will Abdullah’s 20 remain neutral or will they swing to Pakatan Rakyat to give it 102? Either way, with only 59 Umno Members of Parliament, Najib would be far short and would need the other component members of Barisan Nasional to take the chair as Prime Minister.

MCA (15), MIC (3) and Gerakan (2) total another 20. These three parties plus PPP (which has no Parliamentarians) are totally pissed with Umno. They may not throw their lot behind Pakatan Rakyat but they would certainly stay neutral and become the ‘third force’ or ‘independents’. Though Pakatan Rakyat may not benefit from MCA’s, MIC’s and Gerakan’s 20 seats, neither would Umno, or rather Najib.

Najib would need the 30 non-Umno Members of Parliament from Sarawak and the balance 11 from Sabah (totaling 41) to make up his majority. If they too decide to follow MCA, MIC, Gerakan and PPP and stay ‘neutral’, then Najib is sunk. His 59 against Pakatan Rakyat’s 82, Abdullah’s ‘neutral’ 20, and the MCA’s, MIC’s, Gerakan’s, Sabah’s and Sarawak’s ‘neutral’ 61, would mean that he does not have the confidence of the majority and the Agong just can’t appoint him as the new Prime Minister.

Yes, many are looking forward to the 30 Barisan Nasional Members of Parliament crossing over to Pakatan Rakyat to give it 112 seats in Parliament (111 of 222 is exactly 50% so it will be 50% plus one seat). But what if they don’t cross over? What if they just remain neutral or leave Barisan Nasional to create an ‘independent third force’? This too would be enough to deny Najib the Prime Ministership. And there is more than one reason for them to want to remain neutral or to leave Barisan Nasional to become a third force.

This is the dilemma facing Najib. And Mahathir is also greatly concerned. They both know that March 2009 is a long way away. And many things can happen from now till March 2009. The non-Umno component members of Barisan Nasional are reevaluating their relationship with Umno. It is no longer a matter of whether to abandon Umno, and in the process abandon Najib as well. Leaving Umno is almost a foregone conclusion. What they are undecided about is whether they should leave Barisan Nasional to join Pakatan Rakyat or leave to become an independent third force. Both have its merits. In Pakatan Rakyat there is good and bad, as an independent third force there is also good and bad. That is what is preoccupying the minds of the non-Umno component members of Barisan Nasional. And the more mistakes Umno makes the more reason for them to proceed with the divorce. And Umno is making mistakes by the dozen these days.

So they want Raja Petra’s various cases in the Shah Alam, Petaling Jaya and Kuala Lumpur courts to be settled super-fast. The legal brains are mind-boggled as to how fast the courts seem to move in dispensing with justice when it comes to Raja Petra’s cases, when other cases are sometimes known to stretch over ten or twenty years with no end in sight. Why the hurry when it comes to Raja Petra? Is the hurriedness more about Najib than about Raja Petra? Are they hoping that what will be revealed in Raja Petra’s cases will be the noose around Najib’s neck? I can only speculate on the reason but it does not take a rocket scientist to figure this one out.

Sure, Abdullah said that Najib will take over in March 2009. He even did not contest the Umno Presidency and allowed Najib a walkover as part of this plan. But it was not an unqualified assurance. It certainly is subject to certain conditions. And one of those conditions would be that he is free from any legal problems such as being implicated in a murder. The second would be he procures the confidence of the majority of the Members of the House. The failure to fulfill any one of these conditions is enough to disqualify him. And Abdullah has four months to work on the disqualification.

There is no such thing as a sure thing. Najib and Mahathir of all people should know this by now. And who said Abdullah is stupid? He may not be smart but this does not mean he is stupid. And Abdullah may yet prove he is sneakier than most people give him credit for.

I think Malaysians should launch a ‘No to Najib’ campaign. Maybe they should collect 100,000 signatures for a petition to the Agong to appeal to His Majesty not to appoint Najib as Prime Minister in March 2009. Maybe it is not a bad idea after all that Abdullah stays on. At least Pakatan Rakyat can take him on come the next general election in 2012-2013 and finish the job they started on 8 March 2008.


[Portraits of RPK & DSAI courtesy of Knights Templar]