WHAT'S GOING ON ZETI? ARE YOU DOING SOMETHING COVERT TO HELP NAJIB BY LETTING APANDI ZAP YOU

"Why did Bank Negara grant 1MDB three permissions to make remittances,

on Sep 29, 2009

Sep 6, 2010 and

May 20 2011 ?

In other words if this was a crime then why did BNM allow 1MDB to commit the crime THREE TIMES ie

first in Sept. 2009

then repeat the crime a year later on Sept 6. 2010 and finally

commit the crime for the third time eight months later on May 20, 2011.

So there were three instances of BNM letting the crime be committed over a 20 month period".

Folks, the AG has come back with both guns blazing. According to the AG the whole fuss is nothing more than filling up ECM forms (exchange control forms).

1. First here is Malaysiakini reporting on the matter :

Bank Negara mustn't make 1MDB its whipping boy: AG

1MDB cannot be faulted for any alleged offence investigated by Bank Negara Malaysia if the central bank did not seek the clarifications it needed, attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali said today.

"If Bank Negara Malaysia does not request for certain or specific information, how could 1MDB be faulted as it has filled up the form as required and responded to the queries made?" Apandi asked during a press conference at Putrajaya today.

My comments : Zeti had earlier been reported as saying : "Zeti: Bank Negara's move on 1MDB vital for integrity".

Well Zeti, the AG says you have got your knickers all twisted over some filling up forms issue. The AG says 1MDB filled up all the relevant forms and that you did not seek any further clarifications. So can you explain?

Here is The Star reporting the same news :

2. AG mantains 1MDB did not commit any offence under exchange laws

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2015/10/13/1MDB-AG-no-offence-control-laws/

Attorney-General Tan Sri Mohamed Apandi Ali speaks during a press conference at his office in Putrajaya.

PUTRAJAYA - The government investment company 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) did not commit any offence under the Exchange Control Act 1953, said Attorney-General Tan Sri Apandi Ali.

"As far as 1MDB is concerned it needs to fill up the relevant form and respond to the queries by Bank Negara Malaysia. If Bank Negara does not request for certain or specific information, how could 1MDB be faulted as it has filled up the form as required and responded to the queries made," said Apandi.

Speaking at a press conference at the Attorney-General's Chambers here, Apandi added that 1MDB "rightfully furnished the information required" for the purpose of the remittances.

He said that 1MDB obtained three permissions from Bank Negara to make remittances, on Sep 29, 2009, Sep 6, 2010 and May 20 2011.

"It is noted that Bank Negara did not take more than three days to grant the permissions on all three occasions," said Apandi.

He added that the relevant exchange control forms, 09A and 06B do not require the applicant to supply the names of beneficiary owners or the bank account numbers of recipients or the manner as to how the funds are to be channeled.

Apandi said that when 1MDB requested Deutsche Bank (Malaysia) Berhad to remit to a different account, the bank sought clearance from Bank Negara.

"Bank Negara being the controller did not stop the remittance or direct Deutsche Bank (Malaysia) Berhad to advise 1MDB to revert to Bank Negara for a review of the permission. Clearly there was no information or further information requested by Bank Negara Malaysia at that material time," said Apandi.

He added that 1MDB rightfully furnished the information required for the purpose of the remittance.

Apandi said the alleged offence investigated by Bank Negara is Paragraph (4)(b) of of Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule to the Exchange Control Act 1953, namely knowingly or recklessly making a statement which is false in a material particular.

"In short the statement must be false and material to the subject matter i.e. the information requested by Bank Negara at the time when the application for remittances were sought for and in response to further information requested by Bank Negara," said Apandi.

My comments : Relying upon the AG's statements, here are some questions for Zeti and Bank Negara Malaysia :

Zeti

1. If BNM does not request for certain or specific information, how could 1MDB be faulted as it has filled up the forms as required and responded to the queries made ?

2. Why did BNM grant 1MDB three permissions to make remittances,

on Sep 29, 2009

Sep 6, 2010 and

May 20 2011 ?

In other words if this was a crime then why did BNM allow 1MDB to commit the crime THREE TIMES ie first in Sept. 2009, then repeat the crime a year later on Sept 6. 2010 and finally commit the crime for the third time eight months later on May 20, 2011.

So there were three instances of BNM letting the crime be committed over a 20 month period.

3. Why did BNM approve 1MDB's requests in not more than three days?

4. Why didnt Bank Negara being the controller stop the remittance or direct Deutsche Bank to advise 1MDB to revert to Bank Negara for a review of the permission ? Why didnt Bank Negara do that?

5. Why did not Bank Negara request for information or further information at that material time ?

Conclusion : Zeti and Bank Negara have some serious answers to provide. I hope it does not become a case of cold feet. -http://syedsoutsidethebox.blogspot.my/