It seems Tun Ling Liong Sik has the upper hand

UPDATE (5.32PM) AT THE END OF THIS ARTICLE

_____________________________________

In the previous article we have read how President Barack Obama sounded so happy in his statement about the TPPA. Bordering gloating, he said that the signing of the TPPA with other 11 Asia Pacific nations will greatly benefit American interests and help put American well-being first.

The USA has the upper hand in this. Their White House website even published a detailed framework on how the TPPA will greatly enhance America’s global trade presence; to the detriment of the other Asia Pacific participants.

Without the detailed content being provided by our own minister in charge, we can conclude that by signing the TPPA, it will only make the President of the USA a very happy man indeed. Only the most wretched would want our Parliament to ratify the TPPA without the public even having a glimpse at the details. Again, we are at a disadvantage.

And MTEM is right, there is no point in debating the TPPA in Parliament.

On a domestic political front, a recent news about Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik agreeing to the calls that PM Najib must step down did not go well with the regime.

Tun Dr Ling was reportedly saying:

“I agree with Mahathir. Because he has taken people’s money and put it in his own personal accounts,” Dr Ling was quoted as telling reporters after attending an event at Tunku Abdul Rahman University College here.

According to the report, the MCA man was asked if he agreed with Dr Mahathir’s demand for Najib to resign from office.

Dismayed by the lack of loyalty by Tun Dr Ling, PM Najib issued a statement asking for an apology for the alleged defamation otherwise, he will sue the retired MCA president.

It is peculiar that the MCA president was castigated and asked to apologise and be threatened with litigation when the original source of the issue, The Wall Street Journal and Sarawak Report were not even sued. In fact, the lawyers meekly asked reassurances from WSJ not to invoke some protective laws before they could even begin to think about seriously having an inclination to decide, whether or not they will proceed with the intention to sue.

But from the money trail as alleged by WSJ and Sarawak Report below, it is clear that some RM42 million from SRC International did go into Najib’s personal bank accounts.

The money trail as alleged by WSJ and Sarawak Report

This is confirmed by MACC themselves in their statement:

“Referring to media reports regarding investments by SRC International Sdn Bhd, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has gone through the issue and found elements that were raised fall under the MACC’s jurisdiction,” MACC deputy chief commissioner (operations) Datuk Seri Mohd Shukri Abdull said in a statement.

“Following the check that was done, it is found that there is basis for the MACC to begin investigations under the MACC Act 2009, and hence, an investigation has since been started.

“In line with legal provisions, the MACC will conduct investigations independently and professionally and comprehensively,” he added in the brief three paragraph statement.

SRC International was the subsidiary of 1MDB before it was parked under MOF beginning January 2012. The fact that two people associated with the case, Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil and Datuk Suboh Mohd Yassin had both fled the country, despite being wanted by the MACC for assistance in the investigation, speaks volume.

It seems, SRC’s sole funding came from the RM4 billion they borrowed from Kumpulan Wang Amanah Pencen (KWAP) back in 2011.

And on record, only up to RM216 million out of RM4 billion was used by SRC International for its business activities in Mongolia. Questions were posed as to what happened to the remaining amount.

We believe should Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik bring this matter to court, then the lawyers suing him must give evidence that indeed public money did not finally enter into PM Najib’s personal accounts.

MACC will have to expedite their investigation on the RM42 million fiasco and their findings must be brought into the trial.

Should the judiciary is brave enough, this can either bring back credibility to the government, or further strengthen Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik’s aforementioned opinion.

But there are many ways to skin a cat. Tun Dr Ling can simply apologise in order not to incur further costs, or the PM’s lawyers can retract the lawsuit in order not to risk a trial, both parties can settle the matter quietly and amicably, or this matter can indeed proceed to the courts.

Regardless, the Tun appears to have the upper hand in this. Because if it was indeed untrue, Najib would have long sued Sarawak Report and the Wall Street Journal.

You might also want to read:

1) Our current economic position?

2) Why so fast to sue Ling but not WSJ, asks Kit Siang

3) The Umno dilemma, where no one’s position is truly safe

4) Kerana Ini Gani Patail Di Ugut?

5) Lessons From Zimbabwe, the Philippines and Togo

6) RM2,600 juta: Mana bukti perbelanjaan untuk Umno?

7) Where is the balance of RM2.6 billion donation, Muhyiddin asks Najib

8) MACC and Bank Negara hunting down 1MDB-SRC International fugitives?

__________________________________________

 Tun Dr Ling Liong Sik early evening today had replied to PM’s letter as below: