Friends in High Places

February 25, 2011

Gani Patail and Vincent Lye go back a long way to their Sabah days where they even shared the same GROs at the Strawberry Club in Kota Kinabalu. With Gani’s help and through various corporate manoeuvres, Vincent Lye managed to take control of Ho Hup and drove Dato’ Low Tuck Choy (Dato’ TC) to be just a minority shareholder.

 

Snappy Fingers in A-G's Chambers

 

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

by Deep Throat A-G Chambers

When the Attorney-General (AG) exercises his prosecution powers on criminal matters under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution of Malaysia, he does so as the Public Prosecutor (PP). This means he acts as the public guardian to maintain law and order, which also means he acts in the public interest.

A-G not acting in the Public Interest

However, in the case of A-G Gani Patail, more often than not, his considerations are not in the public interest, rather it is for his own interests. That is why you have illogical and inconsistent decisions coming from this AG.

MAS did not suffer any loss and Tajuddin is an Angel, say Spinners

It is already public knowledge that MAS had suffered massive losses and was almost bankrupted by Tajuddin Ramli. Yet, when the Director of CCID recommended that Tajuddin should be charged, A-G Gani Patail did not do that. Instead, he charged the Director!

When Malaysia Today produced the Tabung Haji documents which showed AG Gani Patail with Tajudin’s proxy, Shahidan Shafie, taking the Lord For A Ride in doing the Haj together, they said that Malaysia Today is telling a lie.

Haj Trip remains unexplained

Until today, there is no satisfactory explanation from A-G Gani Patail. He wants people to believe that the Haj trip and of him sharing a room with Shahidan was just a coincidence. Shahidan was a former police inspector, OC Secret Societies Johor Bahru, who was charged for corruption. And today he is bosom buddies with A-G Gani Patail. Gani Patail can be so blatant in consorting with crooks and criminals because he thinks he is invincible from the process of the law.

Like the MAS Scandal, AG Gani Patail quite openly uses his position as PP to take sides in corporate disputes. He takes sides and uses his powers as PP to fix and charge real corporate figures with all kinds of funny offences so that his dubious and shady friends can take control of big corporations.

Ho Hup Bhd Case

Let me just show you one example. Ho Hup Bhd was an ailing company which had a huge land bank. Ho Hup was then owned by Dato’ Low Tuck Choy (Dato’ TC). Dato’ Vincent Lye Ek Seang, who is A-G Gani Patail’s good friend, had eyed Ho Hup’s land bank for quite sometime.

Gani Patail and Vincent Lye go back a long way to their Sabah days where they even shared the same GROs(socialites) at the Strawberry Club in Kota Kinabalu. With Gani’s help and through various corporate manoeuvres, Vincent Lye managed to take control of Ho Hup and drove Dato’ TC to be just a minority shareholder.

The moment Vincent Lye gained control of Ho Hup, he fleeced Ho Hup to the bones and sold off Ho Hup’s land bank. Seeing his company being ruined, Dato’ TC managed to rally the minority shareholders to come together to realise the damage caused by Vincent Lye.

After an audit, Dato’ TC and the other minority shareholders lodged several reports against Vincent for fraud, CBT, cheating and misappropriation of property. However, nothing happened. Dato’ TC then called for an EGM and, together with the other minority shareholders, they took steps to force Vincent Lye to leave the company.

That was when Dato’ TC found himself being harassed by AG Gani Patail. Firstly, Gani Patail directed the Registrar of Companies (ROC) to take action to injunct Dato’ TC’s shares in Ho Hup. Eventually, the ROC had to withdraw that action as there was no basis for it from the very beginning. In any event, the minority shareholders have already decided to oust Vincent Lye and his forty thieves.

To show his influence and to demonstrate that the show has not ended, Vincent Lye asked A-G Gani to come on parade with him in the offices of Ho Hup. A-G Gani Patail then strutted around the office to show that he will use his powers against anyone who dared to fight his buddy, Vincent Lye.

Dato’ TC charged

On 15 January 2011, the mainstream media reported that Dato’ TC had instead been charged. A-G Gani Patail and Vincent Lye go back a long way to their Sabah days where they even shared the same GROs at the Strawberry Club in Kota Kinabalu. With Gani’s help and through various corporate manoeuvres, Vincent Lye managed to take control of Ho Hup and drove Dato’ TC to be just a minority shareholder.

A-G Gani Patail and his Buddy Vincent Lye

In case you doubt this story, just look at the picture (above) of A-G Gani Patail and  his buddy Vincent Lye at the Ho Hup Office. Now, is that a show of power or what?

The MAS and Robert Phang Story continues

February 11, 2011

The MAS and Robert Phang Story continues: Charge the KSU for not reporting a bribery attempt

by Din Merican

The MAS scandal is like a fiery comet flying across the sky. It has brought a trail of other scandals into light. The anonymous blogs are now saying that the losses which MAS suffered during Tajuddin Ramli’s time was not true. That it was just a just a fiction. That MAS was never heading towards bankruptcy and the Widespread Asset Unbundling (WAU) exercise was a scam. Who created the fiction and the scam?

Former MAS Managing Director must answer

The best person to answer this question is Dato’ Seri Idris Jala. He was once MAS Managing Director, now entrusted by Prime Minister Najib to implement the country’s Economic Transformation Plan (ETP). It was during Idris’ time that MAS pursued criminal and civil avenues to hold Tajuddin liable for MAS’ losses. So let Idris answer if the losses were just fiction. If it was fiction, then we have a lot to worry in leaving the whole country’s economic fortunes in the hands of Idris Jala.

New Conspiracy Theory

A new conspiracy theory is now being spun by Tajuddin’s supporters that he was booted out by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Economic Planning Unit) Tan Sri Nor Mohamed Yakcop. So, Tajuddin’s henchman and proxy, Shahidan Shafie, with his wide tentacles in every law enforcement agency, including being A-G Gani Patail’s close friend, is now hunting those connected to Nor Mohamed. Shahidan is now exacting revenge for Tajuddin.

Only yesterday, the MACC charged Nor Mohamed Yakcop’s former political secretary, Hasbie Satar, for money-laundering. Hasbie, 37, from Sarawak (Idris Jala’s home state) appeared alone and unrepresented when he was charged under Section 4 (1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Anti-Terrorism Financing Act 2001. This offence carries a fine of RM5million or jail term of five years.

Targetting the High Performer Azman Mokhtar,  Khazanah Nasional CEO

Now Tajuddin and Shahidan are targeting the founders of the consultancy firm, Bina Fikir, which was responsible for WAU. Using the blogs, they have linked Nor Mohamed to Bina Fikir’s founders, Rashdan and Cambridge educated Tan Sri Azman Mokhtar who is now heading Khazanah Nasional Berhad, the nation’s investment arm. There are whispers within Khazanah that MACC has been busy visiting Khazanah on uncorroborated allegations. It seems that high performer Azman Mokhtar is being harassed using the MACC. It seems nobody is safe from the wrath of Tajuddin Ramli.

Bribery Allegation Against Robert Phang

Earlier on, using the same anonymous blogs they made an allegation that Tan Sri Robert Phang had attempted to bribe a Secretary-General or Ketua Setiausaha (KSU) of a ministry. To seek vindication and to be cleared early of these allegations, Tan Sri Robert Phang has resigned from the MACC Panel to facilitate the investigations. Since then, the MACC has gone quiet. Instead of hastening their investigation to clear Robert Phang, the MACC seems to be doing nothing. Or is something being planned so that the KSU in question will co-operate with the agenda?

What do we know about the bribery allegation? The allegation is that sometime before Hari Raya of 2010, the KSU of a Ministry which was awarding a contract worth RM 900 million had had chased Tan Sri Robert Phang out of his office because Phang tried to bribe him. What is so difficult to investigate this allegation?

Just interview the KSU concerned. If the KSU says that story is a lie,that’s the end of it. The MACC should announce that finding openly and then clear Robert Phang so that he can qualify for an extension when the MACC Panel’s term is renewed after February 24. Why is the MACC dragging its feet? Is there any reason in delaying the investigation? Is it to disqualify Phang from seeking re-appointment. Clearly public opinion is behind Phang to be re-appointed in that Panel because  Phang is the lone voice who has refused to be a rubberstamp.

On the other hand, if the KSU confirms the bribery allegation, then further investigations must be conducted. The KSU must be asked if he had reported that incident to his immediate boss, the Ketua Setiausaha Negara (KSN). If he did, what did the KSN advise him to do? Did the KSN direct him to lodge a report with the MACC? If neither of them reported to the MACC, then both of the KSN and the KSU should be  hauled up and charged for failing to report a bribery. That is an offence under s. 25 of the MACC Act which provides as follows:

S. 25  Duty to report bribery transactions

(1)     Any person to whom any gratification is given, promised, or offered, in contravention of any provision of this Act shall report such gift, promise or offer together with the name, if known, of the person who gave, promised or offered such gratification to him to the nearest officer of the commission or police officer.

(2)    Any person who fails to comply with subsection (1) commits an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding one hundred thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years or to both.

(3)     Any person from whom any gratification has been solicited or obtained, or an attempt has been made to obtain such gratification, in contravention of any provision of this Act shall at the earliest opportunity thereafter report such soliciting or obtaining of, or attempt to obtain, the gratification together with the full and true description and if known, the name of the person who solicited, or obtained, or attempted to obtain, the gratification from him to the nearest officer of the commission or police officer.

(4)    Any person who fails, without reasonable excuse, to comply with subsection (3) commits an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine not exceeding ten thousand ringgit or to imprisonment.

That is how simple the investigation should be. That is how simple it is to ascertain if the KSU, the MACC and the A-G are trying to fix Robert Phang for speaking out about A-G Gani Patail’s connections to Shahidan Shafie and Tajuddin Ramli. Let the KSU be forewarned that he can be fined RM100,000 and imprisoned for 10 years if now tries to fix Phang by admitting there was such a bribery attempt .

If the KSU tries to play ball now, whereas he did not report that bribery attempt in September of 2010, then I have no hesitation to say that the public have every right to demand that MACC charge the KSU for not reporting the bribery attempt!

Bar Ragunath from the Bar!

December 6, 2010

BREAKING NEWS: Mahathir’s Political Crony, Al-Toyol was charged at Shah Alam Sessions Court

Former Selangor Menteri Besar and Mahathir political crony, Dr Mohd Khir Toyo (Al-Toyol) has been charged with corruption, alongside Ditamas Sdn Bhd director Shamsuddin Haryoni. Al-Toyol was charged under Section 165 of the Penal Code, with knowingly accepting a bribe, in form of two plots of land in Section 7, Shah Alam, for his mansion  at a substantial discount from Shamsuddin.

Istana Toyol with the help of Ketok Magik

Judge Azhaniz Teh Azman Azhanis then set bail at RM750,000.Can we expect more to come ? In PKFZ, where some UMNO big wigs are involved in a scandalous land acquisition deal, and in Tourism Malaysia, for example.–Din Merican

http://www.malaysiakini.com/news/150062

December 5, 2010

Bar Ragunath from the Bar!

by Din Merican

On  November 24, Raja Petra Kamarudin (RPK) exposed the Haj pilgrimage  scandal involving Attorney-General (AG) Gani Patail and the former Malaysia Airlines Chairman Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli’s proxy, Shahidan Shafie.

And after doing all these evil deeds, they purport to repent and put on a public show of visiting God’s house in Mecca to seek forgiveness.

ACT 1: Enter Robert Phang

On November 30, Tan Sri Robert Phang Miow Sin, a member of the Consultation and Corruption Prevention Panel of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) gave a press conference demanding AG Gani Patail to explain his conduct as exposed by RPK. Phang also accused AG Gani of selective prosecution and mentioned several cases including that of Lawyer Rosli Dahlan.

The alternative media has created the perception that Rosli has been victimised as a result of his professional role in pursuing civil and criminal action against former Malaysia Airlines chairman Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli.

Phang said that Rosli had been victimised because he pursued civil and criminal actions against Tajudin Ramli. MACC’s apparent reluctance to take any action against Tajuddin and Shahidan raised a lot of suspicions, especially since report by the MD of MASKargo, Shahari Sulaiman, specifically mentioned Shahidan Shafie as Tajuddin’s proxy who orchestrated the police closure of the MAS case. Shahidan has his wheeling dealing tentacles everywhere in the law enforcement agencies. He is Mr Fixit.

Shahidan Shafie is known as Mr. Fixit

The AG refuses to drop the case against Rosli Dahlan

Yet, AG Gani refused to allow MACC to withdraw the case against Rosli. According to AG Gani, he has absolute discretion under Article 145(3) of the Federal Constitution and there is nothing anyone can do about it. AG Gani flatly rejected the recommendation by MACC’s Chief Commissioner, Dato Seri Abu Kassim, to withdraw the charge against Rosli. Abu Kassim knew that the MACC is flogging a dead horse in Rosli’s case. Abu Kassim told Tan Sri Robert Phang, former  Senator Dato William Lau and several others that the MACC did not want to drag Rosli’s case any further. But AG Gani Patail said  NO. He wanted to teach Rosli a lesson as a signal to everyone else never ever to go against him.

AG Gani flatly rejected the recommendation by MACC’s Chief Commissioner, Dato Seri Abu Kassim, to withdraw the charge against Rosli.

 

ACT 2: Minister Nazri Aziz and the Mainstream Media

When Tan Sri Robert Phang gave his press conference on  November 30, he was concerned that the MACC was being seen as a rubber stamp to all the wrongs committed by AG Gani Patail as accused by Dato’ Mat Zain Ibrahim, formerly OCCI KL, in his public letters. But the main stream media (MSM) -  The Star, The NST, Utusan Malaysia and Berita Harian were extremely quiet, as if there was a news embargo to report against anything about AG Gani or Shahidan. The same MSM selectively chose not to report on Robert Phang‘s press conference. Those that reported, picked Phang‘s quotes very selectively.

Selective Reporting and Spin by Mainstream Media (MSM)

Yet, the next day, the MSM widely publicised Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department, YB Dato‘ Seri Mohd Nazri Aziz, slamming Phang for that press conference. Feeling hurt that Nazri had used some unMinisterial language on him, Phang responded with a biting press statement. Again, the MSM embargoed Phang’s press statement, which you can see in my previous posting. Phang is no old coot who only whines. To take on Nazri Aziz, a person has to be a “real jantan“. Those are not my words. Those are Nazri’s words whenever he challenges anyone. Now that Phang has retorted, we will wait and see whether Nazri barks and bites to see who is the real jantan between them!

Nazri had used some unMinisterial language

To be fair to Phang, his retort to the Minister is legitimate. There was no necessity for Nazri to be over defensive by being offensive. The public has a right to know if AG Gani is compromised by his relationship to Tajuddin’s proxy. The public is entitled to know if AG Gani’s decision not to pursue action against Tajuddin is tainted by his close relationship with Shahidan. Is that an innocent social relationship? If it is, since when have they known each other? Did they know each other when the AG Chambers decided to close the MAS case?

Shahidan Shafie: Mr Fixit and Tajuddin’s Proxy

As for Shahidan, he has a chequered and dubious past. He was charged for bribery when he was the OC Secret Societies in Johore. It would be unbelievable for the AG if he claims he did not know this. The MACC has this record on Shahidan. Shahidan’s cousin and adopted sister, Rizana Daud, is married to Tajuddin’s brother, Bistamam Ramli. Tajuddin made Rizana the Company Secretary of MAS when the plunder of MAS occurred. When Tajuddin left,  MAS had accumulated debts amounting to RM8.8 billion.

As for Shahidan, he has a chequered and dubious past. He was charged for bribery when he was the OC Secret Societies in Johore. It would be unbelievable for the AG if he claims he did not know this.

Is the AG about to say that he did not know all that about Shahidan? Earlier on, RPK had produced eye witness accounts and photographs of AG Gani being beside Shahidan throughout his bereveament over his son’s death– from daylight to sunset. If that is not close relationship, what is then?

The AG: A Public Official?

That brings us to this issue – isn‘t the Attorney General a public officer? Isn‘t there a code of conduct that governs him as a public officer that the MACC should apply against him in evaluating the appropriateness of his conduct in consorting with Shahidan? If the MACC wants to take action against the AG, they can resort to Perintah Am Bab D (Tatakelakuan dan Tatatertib) Pegawai Kerajaan. But I am not going to teach the MACC to do their job. I pointed that out because there is a Malay proverb -“ Hendak seribu daya, tak hendak seribu dalih“ ( where there is a will, there is a way.)

ACT 3: Sudden Appearance of Ragunath Kesavan, Malaysian Bar President

What I really wanted to say in this piece is about the behavior of the President of the Malaysian Bar, Ragunath Kesavan.  He is a strange creature. Instead of focusing on his mandate to serve the interest of his legal fraternity, he dabbles in politics. coming from the President of the Malaysian Bar. His recent statement in defence of AG Gani’s conduct  is echoing Minister Nazri’s statement. Why is that coming from the President of the Malaysian Bar?

He is a strange creature. Instead of focusing on his mandate to serve the interest of his legal fraternity, he dabbles in politics. 

In case you wonder what is the Malaysian Bar, let me explain. The Malaysian Bar is a body, like an association, that represents all lawyers in the country. To be a lawyer, you must be admitted to the Bar. The Bar is managed, governed and regulated by a  committee that is elected by lawyers called the Bar Council, which is established under the Legal Profession Act. Ragunath Kesavan is the President of the Bar Council , which means he is supposed to voice out and protect the interest of his members – the lawyers in this country. Is he doing that?

We are now seeing a public spat between Robert Phang and Nazri Aziz. Phang wants AG Gani to explain his conduct, but Nazri says AG Gani owes no explanation to Phang whom Nazri regards as someone ordinary from the street. Phang has openly slammed AG Gani for victimizing Lawyer Rosli Dahlan. And Phang is not even a lawyer. He is not an office bearer in the Bar Council and he has nothing to do with the Bar. He is a social activist fighting for the cause of justice, and he sees injustice in the way Lawyer Rosli was treated.

Now should not that be the role of the Ragunath, President of the Malaysian Bar? Do we hear Ragunath issuing any statement to support Rosli as a member of the Bar? When an opportunity is created by Robert Phang, did Ragunath show his leadership of the Bar by articulating the misconducts of the AG with Shahidan? Sadly No!

Instead, we have the President of the Bar, Ragunath Kesavan, sounding apologetic, sympathetic and even defensive of AG Gani Patail. I am repulsed by the comments made by Ragunath to Malaysiakini’s Hafiz Yatim on December 3. When asked whether AG Gani should be made answerable, Ragunath said: “I am not sure whether Abdul Gani should answer them, but we feel it would depend solely on him to respond.”

Ragunath also said that he was aware of the photographs of AG Gani’s visit to Shahidan’s house posted on the Malaysia Today website, but then apologetically added  that “There were many other people there, not only Abdul Gani, and this should not be an issue.” The AG spent more than a normal visiting hours at the funeral too !

Shahidan Shafie (his hand slightly covering his face) consoled by the Attorney-General

When Ragunath was asked about any possibility of a relationship between AG Gani and Shahidan that would have prompted the “no action” against Tajuddin, Ragunath dismissed it as just a rumour. A rumour?! What is wrong with this man?

Ragunath also question that the situation between AG Gani and Shahidan : Still there is no proven link  ?

Ragunath also said that the situation between AG Gani and Shahidan differed from the VK Lingam/CJ Eusoff Chin affair and then added that – “In the present case, there is no proven link and that without such evidence, the Bar Council would not be critical about the allegations made against AG Gani.”

I was aghast upon Ragunath’s answers. This man is an embarrassment to the Bar, which had gained so much respect during the tenure of its previous President, Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan. Either he is a political moron, or he has a personal agenda. There are so many things that he could say about as to the proper conduct of a public officer like the Attorney General. He could refer to the Perintah Am Bab D (Tatakelakuan dan Tatatertib) Pegawai Kerajaan which is clearly applicable to  AG Gani Patail:

BAHAGIAN II TATAKELAKUAN

4.(2)Seseorang pegawai tidak boleh—

(a)       membelakangkan tugas awamnya demi kepentingan peribadinya;

(b)       berkelakuan dengan sedemikian cara yang mungkin menyebabkan kepentingan peribadinya bercanggah dengan tugas awamnya;

(c)       berkelakuan dengan apa-apa cara yang mungkin menyebabkan syak yang munasabah bahawa—

(i) dia telah membiarkan kepentingan peribadinya bercanggah dengan tugas awamnya sehingga menjejaskan kebergunaannya sebagai seorang pegawai awam; atau

(ii) dia telah menggunakan kedudukan awamnya bagi faedahnya sendiri;

(d)   berkelakuan dengan sedemikian cara sehingga memburukkan nama atau mencemarkan nama perkhidmatan awam;

(e)       kurang cekap atau kurang berusaha;

(f)         tidak jujur atau tidak amanah;

(g)       tidak bertanggungjawab.

All Ragunath had to do was to tick any of the above limbs that would apply to AG Gani Gani in his relationship with Shahidan. In case his frozen brain is still uncertain which limb is applicable to AG Gani Patail, now let me help him – tick “All of the above“. Truly, AG Gani Patail’s conduct breeds more than just suspicion that he had been compromised.

Ragunath could also have alluded to the fact that the AG’s post is that of a Federal Court Judge as provided for under Art. 145(1) of the Federal Constitution. That would subject AG Gani to some analogy to the Judges’ Code of Ethics as provided for in Art.125(3B) of the Federal Constitution where a Judge can be removed for conduct unbecoming or for causing disrepute to the judiciary. This would include consorting or fraternizing with people of ill repute or disrepute or people of dubious reputation :This Code of ethics may be cited as the Judges’ Code Of Ethics 1994

Judges’ Code Of Ethics 1994 (amended in 2000)

2. 2. (1) This Code of Ethics shall apply to a judge throughout the        period of his service. (1) This Code of Ethics shall apply to a judge throughout the period of his service.

(2) The breach of any provision of this Code of Ethics may constitute aground for the removal of a judge from office.

3. 3. (1) A judge shall not –

(a) Subordinate his judicial duties to his private interests’ ;

(b) Conduct himself in such manner as is likely to bring his private interests into conflict with his judicial duties;

(c) Conduct himself in any manner likely to cause a reasonable suspicion that:

- He has allowed his private interest to come into conflict with his judicial duties so as to impair his usefulness as a judge; or

- He has used his judicial position for his personal advantage;

(d) Conduct himself dishonestly or in such manner as to bring the Judiciary into disrepute or to bring discredit thereto;”

Look Ragunath, I am not a lawyer, but I am not too lazy to read or too dishonest to say things just to please certain people. I say to you, stop playing politics when it affects the life and well being of the people you are sworn to protect. You are the Bar’s President, yet you behave so shamelessly in defence of AG Gani instead of defending your fellow brother at law, Rosli Dahlan. There is a Malay proverb to describe your betrayal of your brother lawyer- “Harapkan pagar, pagar makan padi”.

I have been attending Rosli Dahlan’s trial from Day 1.

Let me say this to you also. I have been attending Rosli Dahlan’s trial from Day 1. In the beginning there was not even a representative from the Bar Council. After I started writing and after RPK publicized the shenanigans in court, then only the Bar started sending its representative. I suspect Ragunath did not want to miss out on a great show. Yet, not a single statement has been issued by  Ragunath Kesavan on the matter. And now he comes to AG Gani’s defence. Now he echoes Nazri Aziz’s stand. What game is Ragunath playing? This Malay proverb aptly applies to Ragunath – “ Sokong membawa rebah”.

This man is playing politics and one day I will tell you why. For the time being, I  urge that lawyers bar Ragunath from the Bar! He should be put on the carpet for his indiscretion.