Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia
No News Is Bad News
Facebook image
Is Malaysia really serious about eradicating corruption, thieves and kleptocrats?
KUALA LUMPUR, March 29, 2024: Sam Bankman-Fried was jailed 25 years by a judge for stealing US$8 billion from customers of the now-bankrupt FTX cryptocurrency exchange he founded.
That is the real justice for thieves and kleptocrats.
And, do Malaysians and Malaysia have any real justice? Justice in Malaysia is skewered, to say the least.
Justice for the layman and the political elites and super rich are different. No?
What did the disgraced and shameless former prime minister Najib Razak get for stealing from the national coffer?
He was jailed 12 years and fined RM210 million. However, after only serving slightly a year of his sentence, he was given a partial pardon - his 12-year jail sentence was slashed by half to six years and the fine was given a hefty 76% discount, to only RM50 million!
And the undisputed world’s No.1 kleptocrat is still facing multiple cases of corruption charges in court.
Not only that, the jailbird Najib is given extremely VVIP treatment - just look at the way he is dressed when he is escorted to courts by police. No handcuffs, no orange suits like other detainees or prisoners.
Facebook image
And the racial and religious bigoted Umno continues to push for the freeing of their corrupted former party president.
After some 60 years of the corrupted Barisan Nasional (BN)-Umno governance, is it any wonder that Malaysia today are losing out to many others in South-east Asia and Asia - Singapore, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, Vietnam and even Cambodia in terms of socio-economic progress.
And Malaysia is today a more than RM3 trillion (national debt + household debt) debt-ridden country.
No News Is Bad News reproduces below related news reports and commentaries published by Singapore’s Channel News Asia (CNA):
Commentary: Najib's partial pardon will affect trust in Malaysia's institutions, some more than others
As Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim’s government gains momentum in tackling corruption, former PM Najib Razak’s reduced 1MDB sentence - and potential pursuit of a full pardon - will have implications, says ISEAS-Yusof Ishak
Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak had his jail sentence for corruption reduced from 12 to six years. (Photos: Reuters/Hasnoor Hussain; Olivia Harris)
James Chai
07 Mar 2024 06:00AM(Updated: 07 Mar 2024 08:01AM)
KUALA LUMPUR: For better or for worse, public trust in institutions are shaped not by everyday events but the major, though infrequent, events. Former Malaysia prime minister Najib Razak's partial pardon announced in February is one such hallmark event that could redefine how Malaysians perceive the institutions that run the country.
In the past, Malaysians broadly believed that institutions were heavily politicised by the government of the day. However, in recent years, there has been a gradual decoupling of institutions and politics.
Najib was convicted for corruption in the multi-billion 1MDB scandal that shook the country and the financial world and began serving his 12-year jail term in August 2022. The partial pardon halved his sentence and significantly reduced the fines imposed on him.
Not everyone was thrilled by this development related to the biggest corruption scandal in Malaysia’s history. Najib diehard supporters saw a partial pardon as insufficient; others saw a potential backsliding on the government’s commitment to tackle graft.
But how might this affect how Malaysians look at the Pardons Board, the courts and the Attorney General’s Chambers as institutions?
PARDONS BOARD: BLURRING LINES BETWEEN JUSTICE AND MERCY
The most obvious implication is how Malaysians look at the Pardons Board. Amid the outrage, many had called for more accountability in the board’s decisions, including releasing its reasoning and justifications. None had been provided in Najib’s partial pardon.
Other legal experts have also pointed to the conflict of interest in the attorney-general (AG)’s role in the Pardons Board. It puts the AG in an awkward position to advise the Pardons Board on mercy for someone his institution has pursued for conviction.
At the same time, Najib’s partial pardon may now also encourage politicians embroiled in legal cases to push for the Pardons Board to consider their cases after exhausting the criminal appeals process at the courts.
Both may lead to a blurring of lines between justice and mercy. Pushing for more accountability of Pardons Board decisions may push burdens of justice to an institution of mercy. Treating pardon as a norm rather than an exception dilutes the purpose of the Pardons Board and the courts.
However, any push for more transparency will likely still be limited and contained because of deference for the king - who heads the Pardons Board - and his reserved discretion.
COURTS: EARNED CREDIBILITY NOT EASILY DESTROYED
No matter the decision of the Pardons Board, the courts’ credibility is not likely to be affected. The majority of Malaysians, who believed that the Federal Court decision to send Najib to prison was correct after a comprehensive appeals process, would likely still believe in the court’s wisdom to dispense judgments in future cases.
Under Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat’s leadership, perception of the judicial system has recovered from its inglorious 1988 constitutional crisis and 2007 Lingam tape scandal about alleged fixing of judicial promotions, which cast doubt on judges’ credibility.
High-profile cases like the sentencing of Najib - the first former prime minister in Malaysia to be jailed - has substantially changed public opinion for the better. It showed that the court was unafraid to mete out judgments - even criminal ones - against high-profile politicians, even those from the ruling party.
Neither do politicians’ court cases all end up with the same predictable outcomes. It lends credence to the notion that their cases were decided on individual merits instead of extraneous factors.
In March 2023, the courts found Najib not guilty of 1MDB-related audit tampering. The courts similarly acquitted United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) party president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in the foreign visa system bribery case and UMNO secretary-general Ahmad Maslan of money laundering charges.
The courts’ credibility has been earned through the past few years. It will likely be unaffected by Najib’s partial pardon, but there may be concerns of whether the final appeals courts’ will be truly final when it involves politicians.
Malaysia’s Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi gestures outside the High Court after the discharge not amounting to an acquittal in relation to his Yayasan Akalbudi graft case. (Photo: Bernama)
ATTORNEY GENERAL’S CHAMBERS: NEEDS MORE CONVINCING
However, the AGC’s perceived independence on corruption cases will continue to be challenging, even without Najib’s partial pardon.
Not least because the attorney-general is a position appointed by the prime minister of the day, and the series of discharges not amounting to acquittal involving high-profile politicians will always invite criticism, regardless of its merits.
It is the absolute discretion for the AG to initiate, continue or discontinue the prosecution of a case. If the AGC decides to drop charges - as prosecutors did with Mr Ahmad Zahid in September 2023 in a separate charity foundation graft case - the courts have no power to insist otherwise. No reason by the AGC is needed.
Even though the new AG Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh was only appointed less than a year ago, he carries the burden of prosecuting corruption cases without fear or favour - like that of former finance minister Daim Zainuddin, who was charged in February for failing to disclose assets, as part of a probe into those named in the leaked Pandora Papers.
This may be more challenging than it appears. Political cases will always be seen as biased, even if pursued purely on its merits without political interference. UMNO politicians charged a few years ago cried political witch-hunt by the then prime minister Mahathir Mohamad; the same has happened now with probes into Dr Mahathir’s close associates and children.
Najib’s pardon likely would not affect the perception of the AGC. Efforts by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to split the AG's dual role of chief legal adviser and lead criminal prosecutor will matter more. Only with this would the public be confident that prosecutions are made in the interest of justice and society, even against senior officials, and not beholden to the government of the day.
NAJIB RAZAK’S PURSUIT FOR FULL PARDON?
Even though Najib’s partial pardon unlikely had the effect of uniformly diminishing public trust in Malaysia’s institutions and its corruption drive, they might once again be put to the test.
His lawyer said, shortly after his partial pardon was announced, that Najib was considering filing a new pardon request. The jailed former prime minister has consistently denied wrongdoing.
If Najib succeeds, public trust would undoubtedly plummet to a new low. But if he does not, public trust would ironically improve – though more for some than others.
James Chai is a Visiting Fellow of ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute and the author of Sang Kancil (Penguin Random House).
Commentary: Who benefits from former Malaysia PM Najib’s partial pardon?
The controversial halving of Najib Razak’s 12-year sentence, related to the 1MDB corruption scandal, appears to be a boon to multiple stakeholders, says an ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute senior fellow.
Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak was given a partial royal pardon, reducing his 12-year sentence for corruption charges related to the 1MDB scandal. (Photo: Reuters/Lai Seng Sin)
06 Feb 2024 06:00AM
SINGAPORE: While Malaysia ushers in a new monarch under its unique rotating system, attention is divided between the pageantry of the coronation and the fate of an inmate in the infamous Kajang prison.
Last week, tongues and TikTok accounts were atwitter with the news that former prime minister Najib Razak may get out of prison sooner than anticipated. The first national leader in Malaysia to be convicted and imprisoned, Najib began his 12-year sentence for criminal breach of trust, money laundering, and abuse of power pertaining to SRC - an affiliate of the strategic investment fund 1MDB - in August 2022.
Following his incarceration, Najib’s lawyers appealed the monarch for a pardon in September 2022 and April 2023. Under Malaysia’s legal system, the power to grant full or partial pardons lies with the king. While receiving advice from the Pardons Board, which includes the Attorney-General, the Minister of Federal Territories, and three other members, the monarch had sole prerogative to decide.
On Jan 29, the Pardons Board met with the king, Sultan Abdullah of Pahang, for the last time before he yielded the crown to the Sultan of Johor. While Malaysians waited for the decision with bated breath, the board and Cabinet members kept mum - not wishing to divert attention from the royal proceedings.
Some were too keen by half, with Utusan Melayu - the newspaper long affiliated with Najib’s party, the United Malays National Organisation (UMNO) - jumping the gun and reporting that he had been fully pardoned. However, the daily later had to issue a retraction, as this could not be verified.
Following this, CNA broke the story that King Abdullah slashed Najib’s sentence from 12 to six years, and also reduced the accompanying fine of RM210 million (US$44.5 million) to an undisclosed amount. The official decision by the Pardons Board on Friday (Feb 2) confirmed the halving of Najib’s sentence.
The board announced that Najib’s fine would be reduced to RM50 million, but he would need to serve an additional year in prison if it is not paid. The specific wording of the Pardons Board’s declaration looks to rule out an earlier release for good behaviour.
MOTIVES FOR REDUCTION
While the internal discussions held by the board will be kept private, it appears that there are several motives for the reduction. The first would be the spirit of reconciliation, given that Najib is a senior political figure who still commands considerable support within his party, UMNO.
The second would be links between the monarch and Najib, given that the latter is also from Pahang and is a member of that state’s aristocracy. Yet, in granting only a reduction in Najib’s sentence as opposed to a full pardon, the outgoing monarch is spared any later embarrassment should the former prime minister be convicted of any of his pending charges and receive another custodial sentence.
Beyond this, this legal denouement is likely to be relatively well-received by various quarters.
First, while UMNO diehards have been pushing for a full pardon, this decision goes at least some way to meeting their demands. The party, a member of the unity government, has at least a demonstrable deliverable to show for months of lobbying. This will minimise the chances of disgruntled party insiders tipping the apple cart in a fit of pique.
Second, the decision has aroused anger and angst among urbanites across the nation, who have questioned the process and rationale for the partial reprieve.
Yet, Najib is still in prison, and there are other, larger cases against him. Indeed, he faces charges of abuse of power and money laundering of a staggering RM2 billion pertaining to 1MDB. Thus, Najib has not gotten off scot-free and his legal travails are far from over.
Should the former prime minister have been granted a full pardon (and his other cases mysteriously vanished), he would have been able to resume his political career. However, Najib’s partial pardon means that he will be sidelined for at least one electoral cycle.
This is because following his release, the former prime minister will be barred from holding political office for five years. Thus, should Najib be released in August 2028, this would be well past the next general election which is due by late 2027. Indeed, he would not be able to run for office himself until August 2033.
PLAYERS WHO STAND TO BENEFIT
There are other players who stand to benefit from this denouement. The first is deputy prime minister and UMNO president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi. While Ahmad Zahid has undisputed control of UMNO at the party’s apex, Najib, also known as “Bossku”, has much deeper support within the party - particularly at the influential division level.
Were his former leader to return to active politics, Ahmad Zahid could well be upstaged. Thus, the current party head is best served by being seen to fight for Najib’s release rather than actually achieving it.
Despite some minor turbulence ahead, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim is flying high. While he will cop some flak from his base, he can argue that the decision was solely the monarch’s prerogative. Indeed, Anwar was not at Monday’s meeting and has stated that the ultimate decision is in the hands of the Pardons Board.
No component of Anwar’s Pakatan Harapan coalition has threatened to pull out over the decision. Najib is sidelined and can be put under further legal pressure via his remaining cases, and Ahmad Zahid himself has a dismissal not amounting to an acquittal that can be reactivated if necessary.
For Anwar, who was booted from UMNO a quarter of a century ago, holding the current and past party presidents by the jugular must be poetic justice.
Dr Francis E Hutchinson is a Senior Fellow and coordinator of the Malaysia Studies Programme at the ISEAS - Yusof Ishak Institute.
Source: Others/el
Commentary: Anti-corruption sweep exposes a disturbing truth in Malaysia
With former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin and others caught in the widening anti-corruption net, Anwar Ibrahim might have the momentum to push through political funding law reform, says CNA’s Leslie Lopez.
Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has made battling corruption the central plank of his reform government. But there are gripes over delays on pushing ahead with law to regulate political funding. (Photo: Facebook/Anwar Ibrahim)
21 Mar 2023 06:07AM(Updated: 21 Mar 2023 10:35AM)
KUALA LUMPUR: Before taking over as Malaysian Prime Minister in November last year, Anwar Ibrahim often told his closest advisors that reforms to regulate political funding would be a priority. But it appears taming widespread corruption in government and politics must take precedence.
Recent charges brought against former prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin and several leaders of his Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia (Bersatu) party over governance breaches in a COVID-19 stimulus programme that was introduced in November 2020 to jumpstart the economy show that state capture remains a huge problem and little has been learnt from the debacle surrounding 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
Muhyiddin has been slapped with seven separate charges that involved the abuse of power, mounting to RM237.5 million (US$53 million), and money laundering, totalling RM195 million.
The corruption and money laundering charges revolve around alleged bribes Muhyiddin and his colleagues received from companies awarded contracts under the Jana Wibawa programme that were credited into the party’s bank accounts. The Bersatu bank accounts, frozen by the government last month, showed balances of more than RM300 million, much of it amassed during the party's leadership of government for 17 months beginning March 2020.
The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), the lead agency in the graft clampdown, has already arrested several persons of interest, alleged to be involved not only in the payment of kickbacks but also in trying to shut down government investigations.
Already, one MACC official was arrested on suspicions that he was being courted with financial inducements to cover up ongoing probes into people close to Muhyiddin.
JUST HOW WIDESPREAD CORRUPTION HAS BECOME
The widening anti-corruption net in recent weeks has exposed a disturbing truth in Malaysia. Money, politics and business have long intermingled at a huge cost to the economy, but just how widespread it has become means serious reform will be needed.
A central plank for the government under Mahathir Mohamad that came to power in mid-1981 was Malaysia's ambitious privatisation policy. While privatisation was generally in line with economic policy thinking at that time, it had been criticised as promoting corruption, where companies aligned to the ruling government coalition were awarded the rights to manage state assets or to develop, implement and manage new public works projects and services under long and lucrative concession periods.
By the time Najib Razak took over as prime minister in late March 2009 from Mahathir’s successor Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Malaysian economy had become heavily politicised, leading to serious inefficiencies.
Contract awards, such as the construction of the mass rail systems, railway networks and toll road concessions were often considered to be inflated to extract political premiums. Previously privatised companies were also re-nationalised, such as national carrier Malaysia Airlines in 2014.
Najib also set up 1MDB, the state-owned investment fund that eventually led to his downfall. Funds raised from multi-billion-dollar bond issues flowed back into Najib’s private accounts to finance his political campaigns for his then-ruling party, United Malays National Organisation (UMNO). The former prime minister began serving his 12-year jail sentence on corruption and money laundering charges in August 2022.
BERSATU AND PAS UNDER FIRE
Bersatu and its Perikatan Nasional (PN) coalition ally, the right-wing Parti Islam Se-Malaysia (PAS), were major beneficiaries of the anti-UMNO sentiment among the politically dominant ethnic Malay community that make up more than 60 per cent of the electorate.
PN’s narrative during the 2022 General Election was to ensure Malaysia did not “fall into the hands of kleptocrats”. Corruption accusations will put a dent in Bersatu’s political standing.
The Jana Wibawa programme was introduced during Malaysia’s COVID-19 movement control order to boost the economy and help bumiputra contractors. But the poor implementation of the stimulus plan stirred widespread disquiet among industry players who complained that funding and contracts were difficult to secure because of red tape and favouritism towards contractors with close ties to the then administration.
The charges against Muhyiddin and the other Bersatu leaders confirmed the earlier suspicions that Jana Wibawa was also a political fundraising scheme.
PAS is also under some heat. Malaysia press reports have stated that the MACC is close to wrapping up its investigation into alleged vote-buying in several constituencies in rural Malay strongholds that were won by PAS in the last election.
REFORM ON POLITICAL FUNDING
Malaysia does not have specific laws to regulate political funding, and current legislation only deals with preventing corruption and other illegal activities during the polls. A proposal to table a law by the previous government late last year was suspended after the parliament was dissolved to pave way for the November General Election.
Close associates of Anwar noted that the prime minister is considering the establishment of a working committee, comprising representatives from political parties, reform groups and the legal profession.
For now, Anwar, who has made targeting corruption a central theme of his reform agenda, has displayed serious political will with the anti-graft clampdown.
Fixing the toxic nexus of politics and business that have come to characterise the Malaysian economy will require more. This anti-corruption sweep may be the momentum Malaysia needs to push through the much-needed law on political funding.
Source: CNA/lo
Bankman-Fried sentenced to 25 years in prison
-29 Mar 2024, 12:04 AM
The sentence follows the 32-year-old’s conviction on Nov 2 for seven counts of fraud and conspiracy.
The sentence is a culmination of Sam Bankman-Fried’s plunge from an ultra-wealthy entrepreneur to the biggest trophy in a crackdown by US authorities. (AP pic)
NEW YORK: Sam Bankman-Fried was sentenced to 25 years in prison by a judge today for stealing US$8 billion from customers of the now-bankrupt FTX cryptocurrency exchange he founded, the last step in the former billionaire wunderkind’s dramatic downfall.
US district judge Lewis Kaplan handed down the sentence at a Manhattan court hearing after rejecting Bankman-Fried’s claim that FTX customers did not actually lose money and accusing him of lying during his trial testimony. A jury found Bankman-Fried, 32, guilty on Nov 2 on seven fraud and conspiracy counts stemming from FTX’s 2022 collapse in what prosecutors have called one of the biggest financial frauds in US history.
“He knew it was wrong,” Kaplan said of Bankman-Fried before handing down the sentence. “He knew it was criminal. He regrets that he made a very bad bet about the likelihood of getting caught. But he is not going to admit a thing, as is his right.”
Bankman-Fried stood with his hands clasped before him as Kaplan read the sentence.
Bankman-Fried, wearing a beige short-sleeve jail t-shirt, acknowledged during 20 minutes of remarks to the judge that FTX customers had suffered and he offered an apology to his former FTX colleagues.
The sentence marked the culmination of Bankman-Fried’s plunge from an ultra-wealthy entrepreneur and major political donor to the biggest trophy to date in a crackdown by US authorities on malfeasance in cryptocurrency markets. Bankman-Fried has vowed to appeal his conviction and sentence.
Kaplan said he had found that FTX customers lost US$8 billion, FTX’s equity investors lost US$1.7 billion, and that lenders to the Alameda Research hedge fund Bankman-Fried founded lost US$1.3 billion.
“The defendant’s assertion that FTX customers and creditors will be paid in full is misleading, it is logically flawed, it is speculative,” Kaplan said. “A thief who takes his loot to Las Vegas and successfully bets the stolen money is not entitled to a discount on the sentence by using his Las Vegas winnings to pay back what he stole.”
The judge also said Bankman-Fried lied during his trial testimony when he said he did not know that his hedge fund had spent customer deposits taken from FTX.
Federal prosecutors had sought a prison sentence of 40 to 50 years. Bankman-Fried’s defence lawyer Marc Mukasey had argued that a sentence of less than 5-1/4 years would be appropriate.
Addressing the judge, Bankman-Fried said, “Customers have been suffering…I didn’t at all mean to minimise that. I also think that’s something that was missing from what I’ve said over the course of this process, and I’m sorry for that.”
Referring to his FTX colleagues, Bankman-Fried told the judge, “They put a lot of themselves into it, and I threw that all away. It haunts me every day.”
Three of his former close associates testified as prosecution witnesses at trial that he had directed them to use FTX customer funds to plug losses at Alameda Research.
Nicolas Roos, a prosecutor with the US attorney’s office in Manhattan, told the judge, “The criminality here is massive in scale. It was pervasive in all aspects of the business.”
During the hearing, Mukasey sought to distance his client from notorious fraudsters like Bernie Madoff.
“Sam was not a ruthless financial serial killer who set out every morning to hurt people,” Mukasey said, describing his client as an “awkward math nerd” who worked hard to get customers their money back after FTX’s collapse.
“Sam Bankman-Fried doesn’t make decisions with malice in his heart,” Mukasey added. “He makes decisions with math in his head.”
Bankman-Fried testified in his own defence that he made mistakes such as not implementing a risk management team, but denied he intended to defraud anyone or steal customers’ money.
He was led into the courtroom for the hearing by members of the US Marshals Service. His parents, Stanford University law professors Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, attended.
Crypto boom
A Massachusetts Institute of Technology graduate, Bankman-Fried rode a boom in the values of bitcoin and other digital assets to a net worth of US$26 billion, according to Forbes magazine, before he turned 30.
Bankman-Fried became known for his mop of unkempt curly hair and commitment to a movement known as effective altruism, which encourages talented young people to focus on earning money and giving it away to worthy causes. He also was one of the biggest contributors to Democratic candidates and political causes ahead of the 2022 US midterm elections.
But prosecutors have said the responsible image he cultivated concealed his years-long embezzlement of customer funds.
Several FTX customers have written to Kaplan expressing dismay that they will be compensated based on the value of their cryptocurrency at the time of FTX’s bankruptcy, rather than the higher levels at which those assets currently trade.
No comments:
Post a Comment