`


THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH
read:
MALAYSIA Tanah Tumpah Darahku

LOVE MALAYSIA!!!


Friday, November 15, 2013

Blogs query Ramli's wealth, but he says 'all accounted for'


Since former Commercial Crime Investigation Department director Ramli Yusuff filed an RM128.5 million lawsuit against attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail and former inspector-general of police Musa Hassan two weeks ago, several blogs have this week been questioning how Ramli accumulated his wealth.

Bloggers like Rocky’s BruThe Unspinners and Bigdog in ‘The Thirteen Million Plus Ringgit Guy Rambles’ are among the blogs questioning how the former top cop amassed his wealth and escaped the clutches of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and the Inland Revenue Board.

Some accused Ramli of being greedy in filing the suit against Gani, Musa, the MACC and the government, despite being cleared by the courts, while others suggested he could have been “on the take” when heading the police CCID.

NONEThe accusations resurfaced after he filed the suit in which he named Gani (left) and Musa in their personal capacities, along with former MACC head of prosecution Nordin Hassan and nine others, including the government.

Some of the blogs listed Ramli’s 13-page declaration made to the police of his assets in 2007 and questioned how he could amassed them, as well as questioning his latest legal action.

Fifty-two assets were allegedly acquired by Ramli during his time in the force, and the blogs also want Ramli to explain how he could have amassed the assets.

Malaysiakini posed the query to Ramli and he said someone within the police might have leaked the information. He also said all the assets are accounted for.

‘Most of it I have sold’

Ramli said the declaration he made with the police are for assets that he had acquired while serving in the police force for 38 years.

He also queried as how confidential  records could have been leaked to the public and suspects that someone whom he had named in the suit could have leaked them.

“Yes, these are assets that I had purchased in my 38 years of service, but what these blogs did not report is that most of it I have sold off. There is another portion in the declaration listing the assets that I have already disposed of.

“I have been purchasing and selling properties since the 1980s and made a gain out of them. All these are accounted for in the declaration and I do not own most of them now,” he said.

Ramli said in his 38 years of service, he had made 35 declarations and all have been accounted for and explained to his superiors.

He also said the MACC had also gone through his list of assets and that was why they did not prefer charges on him as all were accounted for.

Ramli said he was only charged with not declaring the purchase of two shoplots for his sisters, which he does not own, and he was cleared of this by the sessions court, and that this was upheld by the High Court.

“The monthly instalments are paid through the rent gained from the properties and these assets belong to sisters,” said the former top cop.

He denied that he had acquired any of his assets through illegal means. He admitted being quite active in the stock market when several financial institutions granted him ‘margin calls’ facility.

‘Musa’s apology was also over my assets’

Ramli also pointed that he had settled his suit against Musa last month and it was also over the former IGP’s public remark quizzing how he acquired his assets.

He said what was reported in the press was over the “white knight black knight” remark but in actuality it was on Musa’s remark in questioning how he had acquired his assets, similar in manner to the remarks by the blogs.

“I guess they did not realise Musa had agreed to apologise because of the statement he made questioning how I acquired my assets and we settled the suit when he agreed to apologise,” he said.

“However, the new suit against Musa and Gani is a different one as it is on malicious prosecution and conspiracy,” Ramli said.

Following the publication of the allegations in the blog, he did not discount the possibility of filing legal action against the bloggers.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.