It’s easy to show if Najib is innocent

All that needs to be done is for AmBank to disprove WSJ's allegations.

COMMENT

The hullabaloo from PM Najib Razak’s supporters about who the puppet master is in the Wall Street Journal’s (WSJ) revelations on 1MDB seem horribly off the mark. The PM’s allies have focussed on an inconsequential part of the unfolding drama like kamikaze pilots trying to be heroes. The public at this juncture is only mildly interested in who pulled the skeleton out of the PM’s cupboard. What is urgent and scorching on everyone’s minds is whether the skeleton is fake or real.

Last Friday’s expose by WSJ stated clearly that Malaysian government investigators are in possession of the very same documentary information that forms the basis of WSJ’s assertions that large sums of 1MDB money found its way into local bank accounts held under Najib’s name.

Though the spat between Najib and ex-PM Mahathir Mohamad has been hugely entertaining, it is still only secondary to the public’s concern over whether the nation’s CEO is innocent or guilty of the alleged financial improprieties regarding 1MDB. All the non-answers in reply to pertinent queries about 1MDB these last months have done nothing to save Najib’s credibility with the masses.

It is painful to see any leader under suspicion continuing to serve simply because the watchdog government agencies are too paralysed by either fear or misplaced loyalty to do something about his alleged wrongdoing. It would be too embarrassing to see the nation’s leadership eventually turn into a lame duck. It would be untenable and it could never last.

At this late stage, anything less than a total and unqualified disproving of WSJ’s allegations would only serve to reinforce the public’s perception that the report is truthful.

If Najib has been fixed up, as he claims, it would be a simple task to arrange for AmBank’s management to give a clear statement denying that the purported accounts exist or that the alleged transactions took place. The story will no longer hold water and WSJ will have to eat humble pie. This would certainly convince the public of Najib’s innocence better than any international libel suit could. The case would take ages to prosecute and even longer to conclude.

It has been days since the story first appeared and still there is no indication that AmBank is about to confirm or deny the WSJ report. The Attorney- General, who supposedly has in his possession the documented information, is also keeping mum. He has confirmed that the MACC, BNM and PAC have been jointly tasked to look into the matter.

Najib might still want to fire his legal cannons over the Pacific Ocean because it is still the right thing to do. But the WSJ would be just as eager to have its story checked out. It is unlikely that a serious and established publication would risk firing blanks in a mega scoop like this. The editors must have walked the course with their lawyers in anticipation of any legal challenge before teeing-off.

The purported accounts are not across the oceans. They are right here in our own capital. So how difficult can it be for the investigating authorities to get verification? It is reasonable to surmise that Bank Negara has already been in touch with AmBank and will likely share its findings with the MACC, PAC and the Attorney- General if it hasn’t already done so.

There is no instruction manual for handling such an unprecedented situation and every step the authorities take will be cautious and measured. Let us hope that ethical integrity is upheld in this case of all cases and that no one will be allowed to hide behind the secrecy clauses of the Banking and Financial Institutions Act.