Najib likely to reflect on his future and Umno is politically cornered by Anwar’s PH?

Share to help stimulate good governance, ensure future of people & M’sia

No News Is Bad News

Najib likely to reflect on his future and Umno is politically cornered by Anwar’s PH?

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 26, 2025: Now that Malaysia’s No. 1 thief/pencuri Najib “1MDB” Razak has been jailed 15 years and slapped with a hefty RM11.38 billion fine for stealing from and mismanaging 1Malaysia Development Berhad, he must surely sit down and seriously reflect on his future.

The corrupt, disgraced and shameless 72-year-old former Umno president and prime minister, was ordered by the High Court to serve his jail sentence in and from 2028, after he completes his six-year prison sentence in the SRC International case.

That means, if he serves his full-term, he would be freed in 2043 or when he is 90 (younger if given remission for good behaviour or pardoned).

So, Najib will have to seriously think very, very carefully on his future and how to secure his freedom earlier, and he is faced with:

> CONTINUE with his time-wasting and hopeless protracted legal battles to free himself from prison; or

> MUSTER all his resources to settle his taxes and court fines, and then hope for another partial pardon or full pardon.

Ironically, Najib’s personal decision may also affect Umno’s political future.

Why do you think Umno has been lobbying shamelessly to have their thief/pencuri “freed” (read as house arrest/backdoor freedom)?

Umno needs Najib’s funding, especially in the next general election (GE16) which is due in 2027, barring a snap election being called by Malaysia’s 10^th Prime Minister (PMX) Anwar Ibrahim.

Umno is now not only at its political crossroads, it may lose a significant funding from Najib in the next GE.

But, does Umno even realise it is a dying party - left with only 26 seats in the 222-seat Parliament after the last general election.

Does Umno even realise that it may become politically extinct after the next general election (GE16)?

Obviously not, as they continue to behave like political bullies, spewing racial and religiously bigotry in trying to win back Malay votes and, most recently threatened to leave the Unity Government (UG) and dump Pakatan Harapan (PH) over DAP leaders rejoicing jailbird Najib’s failure to secure “freedom”.

Seriously, will Umno president and Deputy Prime Minister Zahid Hamidi really leave UG?

Only the loudmouth racial and religious bigoted Umno youth chief Dr Akmal “Dr Ham/I Am Malay First” Saleh is barking.

Facebook images

 

What is so wrong when law-abiding Malaysians rejoice or celebrate the court’s upholding of the law and justice to deny a thief/pencuri from “freeing” from prison for what he had done to the rakyat dan negara (people and country).

Najib stole millions, if not billions, of Ringgit from the rakyat dan negara and mismanaged 1MDB until Malaysians have to settle loan interests and principal loans until 2053:

  

Ironically, Anwar and Pakatan Harapan (PH) now have the Umno-led Barisan Nasional (BN) cornered financially but corrupt politicians are now having sleepless nights.

Any misbehavior or threat to PH, they risk being hauled up by the law! No?

No News Is Bad News reproduces below two articles found on Facebook:

James Chin

“All Malaysians are very happy to see the end game of the 1MDB,” said James Chin, a professor of Asian studies at the University of Tasmania in Australia. “This means that Najib will be away for a long time and he will definitely miss the next two general elections.”

 

 

 

Hisham Badrul Hashim Spice

BOXING DAY, 1MDB BOXED TRUTHS & THE ART OF SHADOW PUPPETRY: A DAY ORIGINALLY MEANT FOR BOXES, NOT BOXING

Once upon several winters ago, in places where snow falls obediently and turkeys die with dignity, Boxing Day was a gentle, almost apologetic holiday.

A day when servants—having spent Christmas smiling politely while serving goose, pudding, and dignity—were finally allowed to go home with boxes of leftovers and goodwill.

It was a holiday about giving, about tidying up the moral attic after excess.

In other words, it was never meant to involve shouting.

Yet here we are, thousands of kilometres away from frosty windows and chimney smoke, where Boxing Day has evolved into something else entirely:

not boxes for the poor, but boxing gloves for everyone—especially on social media.

In Malaysia, Boxing Day does not arrive quietly.

It arrives swinging.

THE COURTROOM AS A THEATRE WITHOUT POPCORN

Today—26 December 2025 , on this strangely symbolic Friday—history walked into a courtroom and refused to whisper.

The court delivered its verdict in the 1MDB case involving Najib Razak.

A case that has, over the years, acquired the proportions of a national epic:

• The biggest

• The longest (nearly six years—longer than some marriages, shorter than some excuses)

• And involving the kind of numbers that usually require commas, advisors, and denial

Around RM2.6 billion—a figure so large it no longer feels like money but abstract art—was found to have entered a Prime Minister’s personal accounts.

At some point, even calculators start sighing.

WHEN MONEY TAKES THE SCENIC ROUTE

The charges themselves read like a very expensive travel itinerary:

• Four counts of abuse of power

• Twenty-one counts of money laundering

Money that took a scenic route through bonds, subsidiaries, offshore structures, and corporate camouflage—before eventually deciding to rest in a personal account, presumably exhausted.

No one denied the money arrived.

The argument was never whether it came—only why it came, who packed it, and whether it came with a note.

THE DEFENCE OF COSMIC NAIVETY

The defence, repeated with admirable consistency across multiple trials, can be summarised as:

“Yes, the money was there.

But knowledge was not.”

The narrative unfolded like a philosophical riddle:

• The money was real

• The account was real

• The spending was real

• But awareness?

That remained elusive, possibly on holiday.

At various points, responsibility was passed to advisers, intermediaries, and one particularly elusive character, Jho Low, who has since achieved near-mythical status—spoken of often, seen never, blamed always.

If accountability were a relay race, the baton would still be airborne.

ARABIAN NIGHTS, EDITED VERSION

Then came the now-famous claim of Middle Eastern donations—an argument so ambitious it briefly crossed genres.

According to the court, the story eventually resembled something “surpassing even the Arabian Nights,” though notably lacking flying carpets, verified donors, or credible paperwork.

The court found:

• No reliable donor

• No credible documentation

• No reasonable doubt raised

The story, in other words, had excellent imagination but poor footnotes.

THE JUDGE, THE GAVEL, AND THE UNPOPULAR HERO

The verdict was delivered with methodical patience, not flair.

Guilty on:

• All four counts of abuse of power

• All twenty-one counts of money laundering

The judgement was not brief.

It took a full day to explain—because truth, when done properly, is slow and boring.

And boring, oddly enough, is exactly what courts are supposed to be.

THE SOCIAL MEDIA BOXING RING

Outside the courtroom, the real boxing began.

Accounts warmed up.

Memes stretched.

Comment sections sharpened their knives.

Suddenly, everyone became:

• A legal expert

• A forensic accountant

• A moral philosopher

• Or at the very least, a highly confident typist

Judges were analysed.

Past decisions were excavated.

Eyebrows were measured for bias.

It was Boxing Day in its modern form:

no boxes, just punches—mostly rhetorical, occasionally grammatical.

DÉJÀ VU WITH BETTER LIGHTING

Many felt a strange sense of repetition.

The arguments felt familiar.

The outrage recycled.

The disbelief reheated.

Like watching the same episode again, except the ads are louder and the plot more expensive.

Sentence reductions, royal addendum claims, and parallel trials have given the national consciousness a looping soundtrack.

Even cynicism feels tired.

WHAT THE COURT CARES ABOUT (AND WHAT IT DOESN’T)

The court, inconveniently, does not assess:

• Popularity

• Nostalgia

• Sympathy

• Or WhatsApp forwards

It assesses:

• Power

• Responsibility

• Money flow

• The relationship between authority and personal gain

In short, the court asked a painfully simple question:

Can a Prime Minister allow billions of public money into a personal account and later say, “I didn’t know”?

Today, the answer was: No.

THE AWKWARD QUESTION NO ONE CAN SHAKE

Still, a discomfort lingers.

Many Malaysians quietly ask:

• Why only one name?

• Where are the others?

• Why does accountability sometimes feel selective?

These are fair questions.

But they are not defences.

Justice is not a group discount.

The absence of other convictions does not cancel a proven one.

Two wrongs do not produce an acquittal.

BOXING DAY, REDEFINED

So here we are.

A day once meant for generosity now dominated by:

• Screenshots

• Narratives

• Counter-narratives

• And the ancient Malaysian art of arguing while agreeing on nothing

The decision has been made.

The principles must remain.

Respect the court.

Respect separation of powers.

And perhaps—just for today—put the gloves down.

Because justice, like Boxing Day itself, was never meant to be noisy.

It was meant to be fair, even when it disappoints, especially when it doesn’t flatter anyone.

And maybe, just maybe, the real box we should open today is the one marked PUBLIC TRUST—before it becomes too empty to tape shut again.