If Najib and the Defence Minister has nothing to hide....

15 May 2012: Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi insisted that the French courts have no jurisdiction to summon Malaysians to testify in the ongoing inquiry into the Malaysian purchase of French submarines.

“Who are they to issue a warrant of arrest? We are not subjected to French laws,” he said at a press conference after an official visit by the Thai army chief at the Defence Ministry, aired in full by Mob.tv. 

Ahmad Zahid (right) was asked to comment on the statement made by French lawyer Joseph Breham, who is representing human rights NGO Suaram in the civil case on the submarine buys at the French courts.

Breham had said that the presiding judge has the power to issue an international arrest warrant if a subpeona is rejected, including putting out a “red alert” with Interpol.

Ahmad Zahid, who previously said he was willing to testify, later said that neither he or anyone from his ministry will cooperate with the inquiry.

 The next day, Lawyer Joseph Brehem, rebutted Defence Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi’s statement that the French courts have no jurisdiction over Malaysians.
“French courts have jurisdiction on anyone, being French or not, as soon as they are involved in a matter the courts are inquiring on. To say otherwise is either misleading or erroneous,” Brehem (right in photo) said in a statement issued by Suaram

 If the witness refuses to abide by the subpoena, the court can issue a notice mandat d'amener, compelling the witness to appear before it. If the witness (still) fails to oblige, a warrant of arrest may be issued.

“The warrant of arrest is applicable within the French territory, and may be internationalised if the judge deems it necessary,” said Brehem.

 PM Najib Razak and Zahid should just cooperate if they are subpoenaed by the inquiry to save the country from further embarrassment, especially if they have nothing to hide.

 In fact, Zahid and Najib should voluntarily come forward to clear matters up and uphold truth and justice as exemplary ministers and senior leaders of the country.

Otherwise this will be seen as a clear sign of guilt!

French prosecutors: Najib sought US$1bil for Perimekar

From Malaysiakini

French public prosecutors probing shoddy deals in French-Malaysian arms deals found evidence that then-defence minister Najib Abdul Razak had sought US$1 billion (RM3 billion) for local company Perimekar from French shipmaker DCN's subsidiary DCNI.

According to prosecution papers revealed by NGO Suaram today, a fax shows that Najib had asked for the amount for Perimekar as a condition for a meeting with him on July 14, 2001.

The fax,dated June 1, 2001 was from Francois Dupont, the Malaysian representative for private company Thales Asia International, to one D Arnaud.

The document, one of 153 shown to Suaram, was seized by French police from the office of Henri Gide, an officer with Thales.

However, no copy of the fax was provided to media at the press conference today as Suaram said it is not allowed to take the documents out of France.

Instead, the NGO, which is pursuing a civil complaint against state-owned DCN for allegedly paying 114 million euros in defence kickbacks to Perimekar, provided media with notes from its French interpreter.

According to the notes, Dupont had in the fax detailed out the chronology of visits and future actions during a visit to Malaysia, including details of “negotiation meetings with the Ministry of Defence and the management members of Perimekar”.

“(In the negotiations) two contract proposals would be mentioned (from DCNI to Perimekar as well as between Perimekar and the Malaysian government).

“(Dupont) finally indicated a meeting with Datuk Seri Najib in France on July 14, 2001 with the condition that DCNI offers a maximum sum of US$1 billion for Perimekar’s stay (in France),” it reads.

Malaysia purchased two Scorpene class submarines in 2002.

Perimekar is owned by Najib’s associate Abdul Razak Baginda, who was acquitted on a charge of abetting in the murder of Mongolian translator Altantuuyaa Shariibuu, without his defence being called.

Razak Baginda’s company paid 360,000 euros

According to Suaram, another document obtained by the prosecutors revealed that Terasasi Sdn Bhd, a company owned by Abdul Razak and his father, was also linked to the scandal.

Suaram's interpreter noted that prosecutors had on Aug 22, 2011, obtained an invoice faxed to Terasasi Sdn Bhd on Sept 19, 2004, to the then-chief executive officer of Thales, Bernard Baiocco, for the purpose of “success fees”.

The invoice states that 359,450 euros (RM1.43 million) was to be paid into a bank in Petaling Jaya, while a handwritten note on the fax reads:

“Razak demande si ce SF peut etre pris en compte assez vite. Le Support Fee suit avec un rapport (Razak is asking whether the SF can be paid into the account quite urgently. The support fee follows with a report.)”

However, Suaram director Cynthia Gabriel said the prosecutors were still trying to determine whether the ‘Razak’ stated in the note refers to Najib or Abdul Razak.

‘The Great Malaysian Robbery’

Referring to the case as “the Great Malaysian Robbery”, Gabriel said the prosecutors also found “a slew of companies” had been formed to muddy the money trail.

“More retro-commissions have surfaced, allowing the misuse of bodies such as a pilgrimage fund (Lembaga Tabung Haji) and the military pension fund (Lembaga Tabung Angkatan Tentera).

“The Malaysian and French people have clearly been misled, cheated and robbed of their monies through blatant corruption and mismanagement of funds in the name of national safety and security,” Gabriel (right) said.

As such, Suaram demanded that the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission open investigation papers on these new revelations and for the Malaysian government to cooperate with the French inquiry.

It also demands that the Defence Ministry lists out to Parliament the companies involved in the procurement process involving DCN and the commissions paid.

Shocking revelation of Najib now comes with proofs!

By JOHN BERTHELSEN (Editor of Asia Sentinel.)

French investigating magistrates probing the US$1.2 billion (RM3.7 billion) sale of submarines to the Malaysian Defence Ministry are targeting, among other things, a Hong Kong-based company called Terasasi (Hong Kong) Ltd, whose key principal officer is Prime Minister Najib Razak's confidant Abdul Razak Baginda.

Investigators believe that at least some of the 36 million euro (RM144 million) funneled through Terasasi ended up in the pockets of Najib, who was defence minister and deputy prime minister when the two Scorpene submarines were purchased from Thales International or Thint Asia.

The state-owned defence giant DCN, later known as DCNS, and Thales established a joint company named Armaris to manufacture the submarines in 2002.

The two Armaris Scorpenes, named after the first prime minister of Malaysia, Tunku Abdul Rahman, and Najib's father, Tun Abdul Razak, are on duty in Malaysian waters.

Razak Baginda, the former head of a Malaysian think-tank who was at the centre of a 2006 investigation into the death of Mongolian translator and party girl Altantuya Shaariibuu, is listed as one of the two directors of the company, which was previously incorporated on June 28, 2002 as Kinabalu Advisory and Support Services Ltd, according to the Hong Kong Companies Registry.

The other director is Razak Baginda's father, Abdul Malim Baginda.

The Terasasi offices are located on the 19th floor of an office at 3 Lockhart Road in the Wan Chai district of Hong Kong.

There is no indication in Hong Kong government records of what Terasasi's business is. It is only listed as a "local company." However, French authorities say Terasasi apparently received regular payments from Thint Asia.

One payment was for 360,000 euro (RM1.44 million) accompanied with a handwritten note saying "Razak wants it to be paid quickly."

The magistrates have documents that show that the money was funneled from Thint Asia to Terasasi - 3 million euro (RM12 million) of it when Terasasi was still domiciled in Malaysia, and 33 million euro (RM132 million) after it was incorporated in Hong Kong.

Money may have gone to Umno

There is no indication at this point where the money went. French investigators, however, theorise that it was part of 146 million euro (RM585 million) that may have been funneled to Umno officials and Najib, who traveled with Razak Baginda several times to France as defence minister at the time the Malaysians purchased the submarines from DCNS.

On at least one trip in 2004, Altantuya (right), then Razak Baginda's lover, accompanied him to France as a translator. He later jilted her, impelling her to come to Kuala Lumpur to demand US$500,000 (RM1.5 million) from him.

In a handwritten letter found after her death, she wrote that she was attempting to blackmail him, although she didn't say why. Two of Najib's bodyguards were convicted of shooting her in the head and blowing up her body with plastic explosives in September 2006, possibly to hide the fact that she was pregnant when she was killed.

Because her killing does not appear to be connected to the scandal, French investigators are not looking into the causes of her death or the reasons behind it.

Although Razak Baginda was charged with abetting her murder, he was released without having to put up a defence and left for the UK, where he remains. Najib's former bodyguards remain on death row in Malaysia. Their appeal against the death penalty has been delayed, presumably until after national elections expected in May or June this year.

It was previously revealed on the floor of the Dewan Rakyat, Malaysia's parliament, that Perimekar received 114 million euro (RM457 million) as "support services" on the sale of the vessels.

Perimekar at the time was wholly owned by another company, KS Ombak Laut Sdn Bhd, which in turn was also controlled by Razak Baginda and his wife, Mazalinda (left). Perimekar is now 20 percent each owned by the military retirement fund LTAT (Malaysian Armed Forces Fund) and Boustead Holdings.

Two years of police investigation at the behest of human rights NGO Suaram into the sale of the submarines culminated recently with the appointment of investigating magistrates Roger Le Loire and Serge Tournaire at the Paris Tribunal de Grande Instance, according toAgence France Press, which said the probe involves three contracts for the submarines which were signed on June 5, 2002.

According to the documents, the contracts had two components: the sale of two submarines built by Thint and the Spanish shipbuilding firm Izar, for 920 million euro (RM3.7 billion); and the delivery of "logistical support" from Perimekar Bhd - the 114 million euro (RM457 million) - to train the first 200 Royal Malaysian Navy personnel although there is no indication that the company had the wherewithal to train them.

Unexplained costs

Under the bribery conventions of the 32-member Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the French defence contractors could be liable for criminal sanctions if it is proven that no real services were delivered by the companies. Under French law, violators are liable for up to 10 years in prison.

Joseph Breham (left), a lawyer with Solicitors International Human Rights Group which was engaged by Suaram, said in October last year that DCNS often budgeted as much as 8 to 12 percent of its total receipts as "commissions" to grease sales of armaments in third world countries.

Breham said Perimekar had received the commission for "supporting the contract," which he said was a euphemism for unexplained costs, and also for "housing the crew" of the submarines in France.

In France, before 2002, any money used to bribe foreign officials was tax deductible. When the former finance director of DCN made a claim for 31 million euro (RM124 million) allegedly used to bribe the Malaysians for the purchase of the Scorpenes, Breham said, the budget minister questioned such a large bribe, although he did eventually authorise the tax break.

The contracts cited by AFP included the 114 million euro (RM457 million) one paid by the Malaysian government to Perimekar.

The second, called "C5 contract of engineering business," was concluded in August 2000 between DCNI, a subsidiary of DCN, and Thales International Asia worth some 30 million euro (RM120 million). The third was the "consulting agreement" signed in October 2000 between Thint Asia and Terasasi.

The French investigators are also studying one of the invoices issued by Terasasi in August 2004 for 359,450 euro (RM1.4 million) sent to Thint Asia. For investigators, "it appears that... the amounts paid to Terasasi ultimately benefited Najib, the defence minister, or his adviser Razak Baginda."

Olivier Metzner, a lawyer for Thales, told the French daily Le Parisienthat "we have already demonstrated to investigators that there was no corruption in this case."

However, a confidential memorandum made available to Asia Sentinel and Free Malaysia Today states that: "The beneficiaries of these funds are not difficult to imagine: the family clan and Razak Baginda relations. In addition, these funds will find their way to the dominant political party (Umno)."

What is fair?

Anwar, 64, was charged on Aug 8, 2008 under Section 377B of the Penal Code with committing carnal intercourse against the order of nature. (NOTE: This charge is with consent of the "victim" not force rape)

He was accused and acquitted by the High Court of sodomising Mohd Saiful

Is it fair that Saiful, a 20+ man that is 6feet tall get an appeal at the cost of the the reputation and funds of the Malaysian Government, just so that he can defend his dignity?

WELL HE GOT HIS APPEAL!

How about Abdul Razak Baginda? A close friend of Najib who was charge and also acquitted with the murder (blowing up with military gred C4 explosive) of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a pregnant Mongolian women!

Did her family see justice and get an appeal?

NO WAY!

Deputy public prosecutor Tun Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah, who is leading the prosecution, said in a statement today that there would be no appeal because the trial judge had made a finding of fact in acquitting Abdul Razak.

Anwar's acquittal was also on point of fact! So why is there an appeal!

The answer is here!

Why do you fear a guy that looks like Mr Bean?!?

PETALING JAYA: Prominent French human rights lawyer William Bourdon will be deported tonight after being detained for more than four hours by immigration and police officials at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport (KLIA).

Bourdon has been served the deportation order and he will be leaving Kuala Lumpur at 11.30pm along with his wife Lea Forestier to Paris.

Bourdon, in a brief statement, said that the Malaysian police had ordered him to leave the country as soon as possible.

He said when he explained that his return ticket to Paris was only on Sunday, he was told that he would be detained until then.

“We have decided to find the earliest return flight possible at our own costs. I don’t understand this decision as no explanation has been given to me so far,” he added in his hand-written note (photo, below).

“I hereby declare that I have acted as the lawyer for Suaram in full respect of my duties and rules and in perfect compliance with national and international laws.

“I consider that this deportation decision is a breach in the right to freely exercise my profession as a lawyer,” he said.

Bourdon had arrived here from Penang, where he spoke at an event organised by rights group Suaram regarding the controversial Scorpene submarine deal. He was scheduled to give another speech tonight in Petaling Jaya on the submarine scandal, followed by another in Ipoh tomorrow.

But when his Malaysia Airlines flight landed at 11.40am, three immigration officials came on board to escort him off the aircraft. Bourdon was taken to the holding centre where he was questioned for four hours.

Suaram executive director, Cynthia Gabriel, who is at the KLIA, told FMT that she managed to speak to Bourdon and that he was being held in the Immigration Enforcement Division.

“The officials asked him to sign deportation papers in Bahasa Malaysia and of course he refused,” she said. “The French Embassy officials are currently in negotiations with the immigration officials. But the Bourdons are definitely going back to France tonight.”

Meanwhile Fadiah Nadwa Fikri from Lawyers for Liberty (LFL) said that Forestier was released earlier and that she was on her way to the division where Bourdon is being held.

“He has been denied access to lawyers which is ridiculously absurd. And none of the officials have issued any statement on the grounds for his detention.”

According to Fadiah, Forestier was “very shocked and upset over the arbitrariness of situation.”

“Only other experience of William and I denied entry was Tunisia under BenAli… there was a banana republic!,” Forestier was reported to have said, according to tweets from local activists.

The authorities also failed to acknowledge the fact that Bourdon was Suaram’s lawyer on the submarine case and that his deporation would be a breach of his right to perform his duty as a lawyer.

Subang MP Sivarasa Rasiah, and Batu MP Tian Chua, are also at KLIA but their attempts to meet with Bourdon have been denied.

The submarine deal

In June 2002, the Malaysian government signed an agreement with French DCNS and Spainish Navantia for the procurement of two Scorpene class submarines.

The procurement contract was through direct negotiation with the manufacturing companies, said to be with the service of Perimekar Sdn Bhd, linked to academic Abdul Razak Baginda.

The Scorpene issue had been mired in controversy with allegations of kickbacks and linked to the murder of Mongolian national Altantuya Shaariibuu.

Razak, a close aide of Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak, was charged with abetting the murder but was later acquitted.

The controversy had even forced Najib to swear on the Quran to clear his name.

The French authorities are currently probing the deal.

In December 2009, Suaram filed a complaint with the French courts asking for access to information regarding government contracts signed with Perimekar and other information classified as official secrets in Malaysia.

In April 2010, the French courts accepted the request to investigate the claim of corruption for a payment amounting to 114 million euros from DCNS to Perimekar.

It is believe that with his deportation, Bourdon will not be available to be a key speaker for Suaram fund-raising dinner in KL tonight.

Who's work is this!? Immigration?!? On what grounds?!? Innocent people have nothing to fear or hide! So who is scared of this French lawyer? Only the guilty!!! Only the guilty!

For more reading check out this page!

Interesting Govt's Spending Part 2

From Malaysiakini

COMMENT Defence spending accelerated across the board after Prime Minister Najib Razak, called “the driving force” behind Malaysia's military modernisation programme by Foreign Policy in Focus, became defence chief in 2000 - his second tenure in the ministry.

His shopping list included battle tanks from Poland, Russian and British surface-to-air missiles and mobile military bridges, and Pakistani anti-tank missiles, F/A 18 jet fighters, submarines from France and Russian Sukhoi Su-30 fighter aircrafts.
The BN government has been far from transparent in its arms purchases. Instead of calling for competitive bidding on defence contracts, the government has insisted that its military procurement be conducted through private negotiations because of security considerations.

Very often, contracts are given to companies which have links to political leaders. Approving officers, for obvious reasons, then approve projects forwarded by relatives or friends of political leaders.

Once in a while, compromises in the Malaysian armed forces are revealed by retiring civil and armed service personnel. For example, on Aug 8, 1996, on the eve of his optional retirement from the Air Force, RMAF Chief Lt Jen Abdul Ghani Aziz took to task ex-RMAF officers-turned-defence-equipment-suppliers for selling unsuitable and obsolete equipment, and thus compromising the safety of their former colleagues.

The account of how DCNS International of France and the Spanish shipmaker won the contract to build two Scorpene-class submarines for the Malaysian Navy is an example of the non-transparent manner in which defence contracts are awarded and the importance of political connections in gaining these contracts.

The following are some of the sleaze involved in Malaysia's military procurement:

The 'arms for aid' scandal

The 'Arms for Trade' scandal involving the funding of the Pergau hydroelectric dam in Malaysia, revolved around the linking of arms sales (worth RM5 billion) to British overseas aid in the form of Aid-and-Trade Provision (ATP) funding.

The linkage came to light when a senior civil servant in the British Overseas Development Administration (ODA), Tim Lankester, objected to the funding of the un-economical and environmentally damaging dam in 1991 but his objections were over-ruled by the then foreign secretary, Douglas Hurd.

The investigations by the British press into the reasons for the UK government's proceeding with the funding of the dam project in Kelantan centred on the linkage of the two deals, which was against stated government policy.

The scandal highlighted the links between arms transfers and aid provision in the Conservative government's record. It was stated British government policy that there could be no such linkage. This government policy was based on the 1966 Overseas Aid Act.

Allegations of corruption were levelled at the Malaysian government, specifically in theSunday Times.

It provoked a backlash by Mahathir Mohamad's government which announced a 'Buy British Last' policy in 1994.

Soon after, the editor of theSunday Times at the time, Andrew Neil lost his job as editor because of the political impact of the investigations of Pergau.

While the mainstream press in Malaysia published hardly anything on the 'Arms for Aid' scandal which had erupted in Britain in 1994, the British press had a field day which subsequently led to Mahathir's second trade boycott against Britain.

Grisly murder of Altantuya

It took the brutal murder of a Mongolian national, Altantuya Shaaribuu in 2006 to shock the nation and for questions surrounding the purchase of two Scorpene submarines to be asked in this country and in France. Altantuya, a Mongolian translator, was shot in the head on Oct 19, 2006, and then blown up with C4 explosives which are available only from Malaysia's military.

According to testimony in the trial, Altantuya accompanied her then-lover Abdul Razak Baginda to Paris at a time when Malaysia's Defence Ministry was negotiating through a Kuala Lumpur-based company, Perimekar Sdn Bhd, to buy two Scorpene submarines and a used Agosta submarine produced by the French government under a French-Spanish joint venture, Armaris.

Perimekar at the time was owned by a company called Ombak Laut, which was wholly owned by Abdul Razak, who is a close associate of then defence minister Najib. The contract was not competitive.

The Malaysian Defence Ministry paid 1 billion euros (RM4.5 billion) to Amaris for the three submarines, for which Perimekar received a payment of 114 million euros (RM510 million). The total cost of the submarines purchase after including infrastructure, maintenance, weapons, etc, has since risen beyond RM7 billion.

Deputy Defence Minister Zainal Abdidin Zin told the Parliament that the money was paid to Perimekar for “coordination and support services” although the fee amounted to a whopping 11 percent of the sales price for the submarines.

Altantuya, by her own admission in the last letter she wrote before her murder, said she had been blackmailing Abdul Razak, pressuring him for US$500,000. She did not say how she was blackmailing him, leaving open lots of questions.

While two former bodyguards of the then deputy prime minister and defence minister were subsequently found guilty of her grisly murder, it raised suspicion of an official cover-up since their motives were never divulged to the public nor probed in court.

Altantuya had had a relationship with Abdul Razak Baginda, a defence analyst from the Malaysian Strategic Research Centre think-tank, which has close ties to Najib. She had worked as Abdul Razak's translator on a deal to purchase Scorpene submarines from France.

In October 2006, the French newspaper Liberation claimed that Altantuya was informed that the commission paid by Armaris, the French-Spanish consortium involved in Malaysia's acquisition of the submarines of one billion euros (RM4.7 billion), had been deposited in a bank account in Malaysia.

The commission of 114 million euros was allegedly paid into the account of Perimekar, a company that Razak Baginda controlled and Altantuya had flown to Kuala Lumpur with her cousin to demand her share of the commission, which was to have been US$500,000.

Altantuya was reported missing on Oct 19, 2006 by her cousin who lodged a police report and sought help from the Mongolian embassy in Bangkok. She was later discovered murdered and her remains were found in a forested area in Shah Alam.

Two jet engines stolen

Experts say that Malaysia's Air Force suffers from too many aircraft types and aircrafts that fail to keep up with recent purchases by its neighbours. The recent case of the missing jet engines was by no means exceptional when seen in the light of these scandals.

Two F-5E fighter aircraft engines costing RM50 million from the Royal Malaysian Air Force went missing in May 2008 and a police report was lodged in August that year. It was only towards the end of 2009 that the theft of two jet engines was reported in the media.

The possible reason the government did not disclose the loss in 2007 was because the general elections was nearing. Had they done so, the opposition would have had a gala time ridiculing the government.

According to Najib, there was no cover-up on the theft of the jet engines. The jet engines went missing when he was the defence minister in Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's cabinet. It was reported that a brigadier-general and 40 other armed forces personnel had been sacked over the incident.

They were not charged. There was no court martial. It appears the general and several others lost their pension but upon appeal they got it back.

The thefts and subsequent sale of the parts would have affected national security and also have international implications. The United States, which sold the hardware to the RMAF, would surely want to know who the buyers were. Indeed, there is a good possibility that investigations will go international.

N Tharmendran (photo), one of the accused, has since emerged to accuse the RMAF of torture and persecution.

The above is an excerpt from 'Questioning Arms Spending in Malaysia: From Altantuya to Zikorsky', a new book by KUA KIA SOONG. The author is a former MP, college principal and a human rights activist. 'Questioning Arms Spending in Malaysia' is available at all major bookstores.

Bala! Another case with No Further Action Taken!

There will be no further investigations on private investigator P. Balasubramaniam’s conflicting statutory declarations (SDs) as the case is now closed, according to the Attorney-General’s Chambers.

Defacto Law Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, in a written reply in Parliament, said that the A-G’s Chambers’ decision to close the case was because Balasubramaniam’s conflicting SDs did not affect the high-profile trial of murdered Mongolian Altantuya Shaariibuu. (That is the most lame reason I have ever heard!)

Under Section 199 of the Penal Code for providing “false statements.”, offenders are liable to a maximum jail term of three years and a fine.

“Although there are contradictions between the two SDS, the contradictions do not affect the outcome of the trial of Altantuya. Moreover, the individual (Balasubramaniam) is still believed to be abroad,” said Nazri.

The investigations against Balasubramaniam took place after he retracted a statutory declaration in July 2008, which implicated Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Abdul Razak and wife Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor in the murder of Altantuya.

Balasubramaniam, a private investigator hired by Abdul Razak Baginda, who was also Altantuya’s lover, has made many controversial allegations including linking Najib to Altantuya’s murder.

According to Bala’s lawyer Americk Sidhu, the Attorney-General's decision to close the file was aimed at halting embarrassing information from surfacing to implicate Nizam, Rosmah’s business associate Deepak Jaikishan and his brother and a police officer named Inspector Suresh.

This group is believed to have acted with the motive of trying to protect Najib, then the deputy prime minister, and destroy the credibility of the information contained in a previous statutory declaration.

“The A-G can't afford to investigate further as a whole can of worms would be opened up. That is the reason why he AG closed the file,” Americk told Malaysia Chronicle.

“Nothing is going to happen to the culprits because they are all sitting on the correct divide of the political fence. I don't think it is a good outcome. It is another attempt at sweeping stuff under the carpet again. This is something they are experts at.”

Powerful hands behind her killing

The murder of the beautiful 28-year old Altantuya, whom Bala had revealed in his first statutory declaration was Najib’s mistress before he passed her on to his close associate Razak Baginda, has gripped Malaysians for years now.

She was killed in a remote jungle clearing in Selangor in 2006 in a most horrific way. Despite telling her killers she was pregnant, two of Najib’s former bodyguards shot her in the head and blew her body with C4 explosives to prevent identification.

Months after the discovery of her body, rumors began circulating of powerful hands behind her killing. Altantuya, who speaks four languages including Russian and French, had played a role in helping Razak Baginda close a multi-billion ringgit submarines purchase for Najib, who was then the Defense minister.

Bala had been hired by Razak Baginda to stop Altantuya from harassing him for what she had said was her share of the submarines commission paid by French vendor DCNS. It amounted to US$500,000 while Baginda’s firm was allegedly benefitted with a 214 million euros side-deal.

In 2008, after harassment over his police statement which had contained some of these details, Bala decided to blow the whistle. With the help of his lawyers, he made a statutory declaration detailing all the information that had come to his hand while working for Baginda.

For more details!

Bala Resurface to haunt Rosmah!

PART 2 here!

More news you won't get from STAR and NST

Here is a direct news clip from Malaysiakini.

I am quite sure you will not get this reported from the Star or NST!

Seized Mkini video tampered with
Andrew Ong Nov 21, 08 11:19am

The videotape recording of the Nov 9 candlelight vigil in Petaling Jaya, Selangor which was seized by police has been found to have been tampered with.

The videotape and video camera were seized by police at the tail-end of the vigil, held to protest against the Internal Security Act (ISA) and commemorate the first anniversary of the Nov 10 Bersih rally, when 23 participants were arrested.

Malaysiakini videographer Shukri Mohammad, 28, was also arrested. He was later freed on police bail and is required to report back to the Petaling Jaya police station on Nov 24. Police returned the videotape and video camera to Malaysiakini on Tuesday evening. Upon viewing the 36-minute clip, a total of three minutes and 42 seconds of visuals from the vigil were ‘missing' in two instances. The first instance was at the 10 minute and 54 second mark of the tape, when footage of Selangor police chief Khalid Abu Bakar telling vigil participants to disperse was abruptly overwritten with new footage.

May have legal implications

The new footage appeared to be filmed inside a police vehicle by the front passenger. Three minutes and 36 seconds later, the original footage appeared again, this time depicting riot police in front of Amcorp Mall where the vigil participants were gathering. The second tampering occurred 10 seconds later at the 14 minute and 40 seconds mark, where visuals of the riot police in formation were overwritten with footage of a clothing cabinet which lasted for about six seconds. The contents of the 'missing' footage has yet to be ascertained. Shukri yesterday made a report at the Jalan Travers police station on the tampered videotape as it could be used as evidence should he be charged in court. "We are not accusing the police of tampering with evidence as there is the possibility that the footage could be accidentally overwritten when it was in police possession," said Malaysiakini editor-in-chief Steven Gan."Nevertheless, the police should treat potential evidence with the utmost care and not go around playing with our camera."

On another note, one comment from Malaysiakini readers stick out to me.

I paste his comment below!

Ranjeet: Razak Baginda, since you can vouch for Najib and Rosmah, then I assume that you know the full story behind the murder of Altantunya.

Don't tell us who is not involved. I know that I am not involved, everybody else is also not involved. The real murderer too is not involved as he would never admit his involvement.

Then, Razak Baginda, tell us who is involved. Tell us also where is Balasubramaniam. If you do not know, then we are not interested in you. Just thank your luck that you're acquitted and that you were lucky enough to be born in Malaysia the Bolehland.

Which Statutory Declaration was made under duress??

PI P Balasubramaniam has made a second SD stating that his first SD was a lie and that it was made under duress! What do you think!

I found a blog where it showed 2 pictures of the Bala guy during his first and second press conference. Judge for yourself which one Mr Bala is more at easy and which one he looks more under duress.

During the first SD

During the second SD

Also it is interesting to note that almost all the parts I highlighted in red in my previous entry was the part where Mr Bala said was untrue.....hmm........

Private investigator P Balasubramaniam Statutory Declaration

The following is the Statutory Declaration by an ex-police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force, from the Special Branch. Mr. P Balasubramaniam who was apparently Abdul Razak Baginda's former private investigator made the following SD. (I got this from Malaysiakini today and I decided to put this up for people to see as I felt this is important for every Malaysian to read!)

The following is the full 16-page statutory declaration sign by Abdul Razak Baginda's former private investigator P Balasubramaniam on July 1.

MCPX

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ... do solemly and sincerely declare as follows:

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force, having joined as a constable in 1981 attached to the police field force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance corporal and finally resigned from the police force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.

2. I have been working as a freelance private investigator since I left the police force.

3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang between the hours of 8am to 5pm each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the Oct 5, 2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaaribuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind this threat and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.

7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaaribuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian ‘bomoh’ and that he could never look her in the face because of this.

8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.

9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high-profile people involved.

10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaaribuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.

11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.

12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.

13. On Oct 9, 2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30am informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya notepaper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.

14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as ‘Aminah’ and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.

15. These three Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On Oct 11, 2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note which basically asked him to call her urgently.

17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.

18. In the meantime, I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these three Mongolian girls, but they recognised him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.

19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.

20. On the Oct 14, 2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t, so I called the police who arrived in two patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.

22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own private investigator, one Mr Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for US$500,000 and three tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that:

1) He had been introduced to Aminah by Najib Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.

2) Najib Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.

3) Najib Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the deputy prime minister.

4) Najib Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.

5) Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a US$500,000 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On Oct 19, 2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow Proton Perdana taxi pass by with three ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me ‘Happy Deepavali’. The taxi then left.

27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and walked towards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him “Aminah was here”. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me “to delay her until my man comes”.

28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following:

1) That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Najib Razak.
2) That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Najib Razak at a dinner in Paris.

3) That she was promised a sum of US$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris.

4) That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.

5) That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.

6) That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.

7) That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Najib Razak.

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red Proton Aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be lance corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plainclothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said “Yes”. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue Proton Saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The drivers window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.

31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red Proton and exchanged seats so that lance corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that is the last I ever saw of Aminah.

32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.

33. After Oct 19, 2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7pm to 8am the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

34. On the night of Oct 20, 2006, both of Aminah’s girlfriends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi police station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the inspector from Dang Wangi police station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi inspector. The conversation lasted 3-4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about Oct 24, 2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.

41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the criminal division, Brickfields police station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.

42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields police station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumbdrive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.

43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on Oct 26, 2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.
45. In mid-November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminah’s case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under Section 506 of the Penal Code for criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for five days. On the third day, I was released on police bail.

47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for seven days.

48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on Oct 19, 2006 which read “delay her until my man arrives”. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Baginda’s handphone.

49. They then proceeded to record my statement from 8.30 am to 6pm everyday for seven consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Najib Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out.

50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Najib Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30am. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30am, Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Najib Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows: “ I am seeing IGP at 11am today … matter will be solved … be cool”.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.

54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to:

1) State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

2) Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the three accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

3) Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the court prior to submissions at the end of the prosecutions case.

4) Emphasise the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years, I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.

5) Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.

55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal
July 1, 2008

Malaysiakini also reported that Anwar ask the following question, which frankly, I want answer to as well!

a) Suppression of evidence by the police investigating officers and those responsible for prosecuting this case. Such suppression could only have happened with the full knowledge of top public officials such as the IGP and the AG.

b) The question is also raised as to whether such suppression of evidence was the reason behind the last minute switch in DPP's handling the case - where the head of the Criminal Division of the AG's Chambers, Yusuf Zainal Abiden was completely sidelined from the case leading him and the senior DPP originally slotted for the case Sallehudin Saidin to put in papers for early retirement some months later.

c) Questions can be raised now with regard to the sudden switching of the judge fixed to hear the case which took place in March 2007 - why was this really done?

d) Did Najib lie when he said that he had never met Altantuya before?

e) Did Najib lie when he said that he was not involved in any commission deals for the purchases of the Scorpene submarines"

Mind blowing man!!!