Pua snipes at ‘meek’ Najib for protecting Tajuddin Ramli

By Clara Chooi

August 13, 2011

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 13 — DAP MP Tony Pua called Datuk Seri Najib Razak “meek” today for trivialising his administration’s intervention in Tan Sri Tajuddin Ramli’s multibillion ringgit civil suits and accused the prime minister of using subterfuge to save “billionaire cronies”.

By shrugging off the move as a mere “off-site” solution, Pua said Najib was displaying a lack of political will to fight patronage, rent-seeking and cronyism — a pledge the prime minister himself had made when he came to power and announced his maiden New Economic Model (NEM) policy.

“In fact, the ‘off-site’ solution by Najib suggests some secret rendezvous between the two parties to thrash out a handshake deal by subterfuge,” he said in a statement.

Najib, he added, must rescind his administration’s order that all government-linked companies (GLCs) should withdraw their claims against Tajuddin and concentrate its efforts instead on making public its case against the former Malaysia Airlines (MAS) chairman.

The Petaling Jaya Utara MP was responding to Najib’s brief comment on the matter to the media yesterday when the latter appeared to play down the directive, saying it should not be misconstrued as an out-of-court settlement but merely an “off-site” solution to end the long drawn-out financial saga involving Tajuddin.

Tajuddin, a former protégé of Tun Daim Zainuddin, a close friend of former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, is facing billions in lawsuits for allegedly causing MAS to suffer losses in excess of RM8 billion. Tajuddin was the executive chairman of the airline from 1994 to 2001.

But in a letter earlier this month by senior minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, all GLCs, including MAS, Telekom Malaysia and Prokhas Sdn Bhd (formerly Danaharta), were ordered to withdraw their suits against Tajuddin, pending a possible out-of-court settlement.

Pua (picture) said this would be the “most outrageous bailout in Malaysian history” and reminded the administration that it had been forced to pay RM1.79 billion to acquire MAS shares belonging to Tajuddin’s corporate vehicle at RM8 per share despite its market price then being only RM3.62 per share.

“In addition, gross mismanagement by Tajuddin since 1994 has resulted in MAS suffering billions in losses and was laden with RM9.5 billion in debt,” he said, adding that despite asset bundling exercises later, the flag carrier still failed to completely recoup its losses till today.

Pua also questioned the administration’s move to replace all lawyers appointed by the GLCs to handle Tajuddin’s case to a known Umno counsel, saying this clearly unveiled an ultimate plan to set the tycoon free.

Pua also sniped at Nazri for accusing him yesterday of double standards, saying the law minister had used irrelevant examples to support his claim.

Nazri had asked Pua why he had kept silent when certain opposition leaders attempted to interfere in government-related matters despite not being members of the administration.

This was in response to an earlier statement made by Pua that Nazri should be investigated under the Emergency Ordinance for abusing his ministerial authority to settle Tajuddin’s civl cases.

Nazri had used PAS president Datuk Seri Abdul Hadi Awang as an example, pointing out that it had been inappropriate for the politician to call for a meeting with the Selangor Islamic Religious Department (Jais) and the Damansara Utama Methodist Church (DUMC) to discuss the recent raid. Hadi, he pointed out, was neither a member of the Selangor government nor the minister for religious affairs.

“Did minister in Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz really finish law school? The comparison between his action and that of the PAS president is that between night and day, which raises the question of whether Nazri is qualified to take on the role of minister in charge of law,” Pua said.

He pointed out that Hadi had not ordered DUMC or Jais to see him but had instead requested to meet with them to understand the controversy; he had not directed Jais to withdraw its investigation; and, Hadi could not issue any directive as he is not a member of the administration.

But Nazri, on the other hand, Pua pointed out, is a senior Cabinet minister who had “used his public position or office to unduly exercise improper influence over the actions of GLCs, by-passing the GLCs’ board of directors and possibly to obtain pecuniary or other advantage.”