DAP legal bureau chief Gobind Singh Deo has posed 10 questions to attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali regarding the 1MDB scandal.
Among them, is whether Apandi would reveal the documents that he has, which allegedly proves that US$681 million found in Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak's personal accounts were a donation.
"Would the right honorable attorney-general therefore agree with me to a public disclosure of all the documents he has in his possession to substantiate his position that the monies were indeed from a donation so as to dispel concerns over his decision not to prosecute in those cases?
"Apandi cannot expect Malaysians to just sit back and take anything that he says without thinking about it at all.
"He cannot just say and expect everyone to accept that he explains how his decision is based solely on 'the evidence in possession'," Gobind said in a statement today.
Apandi had in January dismissed investigations into the RM2.6 billion donation, saying it was a donation from the Saudi royal family.
This however has been disputed by the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuits, which claim that the a similar amount had instead been siphoned from 1MDB and deposited into the accounts of an unnamed 'Malaysian Official 1'.
Najib's opponents say that he is 'Malaysian Official 1'.
Gobind said Apandi's version of events is now in doubt, asking if the AG had "all the necessary documents before him which were necessary to make a proper decision to begin with".
The Puchong MP, who is a lawyer, also posed the following questions:
- Did the AG refuse consent for mutual legal assistance by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) as alleged?
- If so, why was consent refused?
- Is it not the case that the documents sought through that process were essential to ascertain the money-trail leading to the deposits in an account relevant to that investigation?
- Without that documentary evidence sought, how did he verify the purported claim that the said monies were from a donation?
- Hasn't that decision now been thrown open by the particulars set out in the suit by the DOJ?
- Why did the AG refuse consent for mutual assistance to do get evidence on the 1MDB scandal?
- Is it not the case now that the alleged failure to consent to a request for assistance has seriously impacted on the case?
- Is it not the case further that as a result of that refusal, the AG is now not in a position to dispute the claims made by the DOJ that the monies originated from elsewhere?
Apandi has disputed the DOJ's lawsuits, which claimed that more than US$3.5 billion of 1MDB funds had been siphoned off.
He said there is no evidence of such misappropriation of monies. - Mkini
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.