Najib's 'I did not lie' prompts more questions

Long before Najib Abdul Razak’s prime ministership ended on May 9, I wrote him an open letter, promising to vote for Barisan Nasional (BN), subject to him answering a few questions.

I waited in vain for reactive calls from Najib’s media minders – Habibul Rahman Kadir or Paul Stadlen. In all honesty, I was looking forward to those calls – to show them my two fingers and to tell them to go fly a kite!

The media that Najib and his supporters threatened and cajoled bore no grudges and continued to provide him the platform – the space in the print media and news portals and time in the electronic media.

Previously on orders from his minders, they demonised Dr Mahathir Mohamad and claimed DAP would install a Christian government. But these days, the same editors who were responsible for the “damage” are lining up in London, New York and Putrajaya to kiss Mahathir’s hands and pretend nothing had happened

Last night, there was yet another twist to the 1MDB tale. Najib took to Facebook to declare that he never lied about the RM2.6 billion in his bank account.

“I wish to clarify this issue because it has been manipulated and fully exploited to the point where it has become one of the contributing factors leading to BN’s defeat.

“I wish to emphasise that I have never lied on the issue of the RM2.6 billion donation,” Najib said in a Facebook Live broadcast.

I have to (partly) believe his first assertion, There were other factors for BN’s loss but 1MDB was the “real” factor which turned the tide.

As for the second that he never lied, I have to ask: Really? I really, really want to believe him, but…

On Oct 13 last year, I made a declaration: “I will support the current prime minister and his party – the Barisan Nasional – and urge and encourage right-thinking Malaysians to do the same in the 14th General Glection which is due. This is subject to the PM and the BN making concerted efforts to fulfil the following conditions, which in turn will bring about a better and more prosperous Malaysia.”

One of the conditions was: “The PM must declare the source of the RM2.6 billion in his personal bank accounts to live up the people’s expectations of a clean, transparent and accountable leader of the country. Explanations that the money was a donation from an Arab prince have to be substantiated with documents. On the contrary, documents have emerged from the US Department of Justice (DOJ) that large sums of money had been remitted to said personal accounts from an account of British Virgin Islands company to Tanore Finance in Singapore.”

We have heard enough phrases

The offer was spurned, perhaps on the advice of Najib’s media experts and minders who also chose to ignore reports and commentaries in Malaysiakini. After all, the entire mainstream media was under BN control. Even television stations – private and public – bent backwards to extol the non-existent virtues of the BN and its leaders. (Malaysiakini too was in the list of “don’t touch” news organisations.)

Malaysians have heard enough phrases like “I did not lie on the RM2.6 billion”; “It was a donation from a Saudi prince”; “I returned the money to the donor”; “I am not a thief, robber, nor crook”; and other blabbering that would make even the most honest policemen blush!

Some questions which have yet to be answered by Najib:
If the money was from a Saudi Prince, why should it come in a circuitous route from New York, British Virgin Island, the Seychelles and then to Singapore before being transferred to Najib’s AmBank account?

Najib claims the transfers of money were accompanied by letters from the prince explaining the source of the funds. If this was the case, why didn’t Najib make public these letters public to protest being named as a kleptocrat by the US Department of Justice?

In how many tranches did it come in, since Najib declared he got all the documents accompanying the transactions?

Why did Najib return the money to Tanore Finance in Singapore? Shouldn’t it have been sent to the account of the Saudi prince, say in Riyadh or any other bank account?

Why did he choose to classify part of the Auditor-General’s Report under the Official Secrets Act?

Why were senior officials like Gani Patail and Abu Kassim Mohamed sent into premature retirement?

Shouldn’t he have used these documents as a basis to sue the Wall Street Journal, which first accused him of misdemeanours and transgressions?

One of the documents which Najib produced bore similarities in letters written by Low Taek Jho’s (photo) close associate Eric Tan Kim Loong to US lawyers? Can he explain?

With modern technology, even currencies can be counterfeited. Producing “authentic” letterheads will be child’s play. So, it is no big deal to have documents printed on such letterheads.

One more thing, if my wife was using the government jet to ferry 27 bags to the Middle East for a weekend sojourn, I would have asked: “Why so many bags? What is in them? Why were they not put in the hold instead of the seats?”

If my wife came home every other week with a new handbag or new watch every month, I would certainly demand to know where they came from or where did she get the money to buy them. Yes, you have argued they were gifts but donors don’t pop around every week!

The people have heard enough. Najib is trying to remain relevant with his a-statement-a-day keeps trouble away. He can stand on soap boxes, at ceremah and functions to proclaim his innocence, but most right-thinking Malaysians are not likely to believe him.

Instead of wasting his breath, it would be better if Najib stops making statements – some contradicting each other – to the detriment of his own cases.

---

R NADESWARAN says that the latest “declaration of innocence” will be viewed as just another whopper by all and sundry. Comments: citizen.nades22@gmail.com -Mkini