Is Shukri saying that his decision to probe 1MDB and SRC was at Mahathir’s behest, that he was appointed solely to drag Najib to court on charges of corruption and power abuse related to SRC?
Is Shukri also saying that Zeti is off the hook, that the contradiction brought about by her denial (see below) and the content of a 2015 investigation paper he himself prepared is not being investigated?
Will Shukri be investigated on suspicion that he fabricated the 2015 paper?
Can we conclude that the MACC agrees Hadi never paid Clare RM1.4 million and that the content of my report is true, i.e., Rameli conspired (knowingly or not-knowingly) with Clare, Bank Negara, Maybank and lawyer Americk Sidhu to launder RM1.4 million into the United Kingdom by misleading the Central Bank of London?
KUALA LUMPUR: Dato’ Seri Mohd Shukri Abdull should learn to do three things – keep his mouth shut when not spoken to, keep his statements short and to the point and refrain from denying truths that will return to haunt him.
Following his appointment as MACC chief, the man-who-likes -to-tell-microphones -he’s-the-victim-of-slander, Shukri, sprang up with this huge conspiracy theory about him having been intimidated by the previous Najib administration into cutting corners and throwing investigation papers into dustbins.
On the 22ndof May 2018, Shukri told a press conference (PC) that he was threatened several times throughout the course of his investigations into 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) and SRC International
For the record, SRC is a onetime subsidiary concern of 1MDB that Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail raided after conspiring with the Wall Street Journal to expose ‘discoveries’ from the raid even before the raid happened (read full disclosure below).
Evidence suggests Gani Patail was complicit with WSJ in SRC raid
This is what Shukri had to say:
“My experience in investigating the SRC and 1MDB cases were frightening; I almost died.
“I am sad. Abu Kassim and I were accused of being traitors out to overthrow the government. We were doing our best to save the country and recover money from abroad.”
Yes, you read right. He almost ‘died’.
And he may as well have ‘died’, because what followed thereafter ought to have killed the spirits of anyone who could have been his place.
Not only were there three police reports lodged against him – by me – people everywhere were critical of his claims, which, for all intents and purposes, defied all manner of logic and common sense.
In the first place, if indeed Shukri was intimidated or threatened for whatever reason, why has he yet to lodge a police report against Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak or the former premier’s cat or whoever it is from the previous administration that threatened him?
In the second place, if indeed someone had threatened him, would it not imply that the investigation paper he prepared in 2015 (hereinafter referred to as the “2015 paper”) could have been put together under duress?
So why did Shukri not reinitiate the MACC into the discoveries he conducted in 2015 by calling up everyone he had called when conducting those discoveries?
Note, the discoveries had to do with the RM2.6 billion that was then alleged to have ended in Najib’s personal Ambank account.
During the aforementioned PC, Shukri spoke of how his predecessor, Tan Sri Abu Kassim Mohamed, had instructed him to initiate an investigation into the RM2.6 billion transfer which Najib kept insisting was from the Saudis.
“Tan Sri (Abu Kassim) had hinted of the consequences of indicting a sitting prime minister, and I told him it would not be a problem, as we are doing it for the nation,” he said.
Shukri completed two investigation papers into the RM2.6 billion ‘scandal’ and SRC and questioned more than 100 witnesses throughout the course of his investigation.
Question is, why weren’t the 100 over witnesses recalled when he took over from Abu Kassim as MACC chief?
Come to think of it, why was Shukri even appointed by Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamed to head the MACC, given that the 2015 paper, which was put together under duress, could have been fabricated to put a spin or two on some facts?
Would it not have been prudent and proper to appoint someone else to head the MACC so that the anti-graft agency could then reopen files and investigate Shukri himself along with the “100 over witnesses” to ascertain how much of the 2015 paper was truthful and how much of it was fabricated?
The paper bore entries confirming that the former governor of Bank Negara, Tan Sri Zeti Akhtar Aziz, had known from the get go that the RM2.6 billion in Najib’s account comprised donations and a gift from the Saudi royal family.
The paper also bore entries of Zeti’s dealings with a representative of the Saudi royal household, her dealings with the manager of Ambank Jalan Raja Chulan (where Najib opened an account) and her knowledge of the companies and individuals that facilitated the RM2.6 billion transfer prior to the money ending in the said account.
Shukri himself entered that the suggestion to park RM2.6 billion in Najib’s account had originated from Zeti, meaning, the former MACC chief accepted Zeti’s reasoning that the transfer of such an amount into Najib’s account was in no way controversial or criminal.
Yet, when Zeti denied having any knowledge of the transfer, Shukri made no bones of it or even an effort to haul up the former Bank Negara governor for questioning.
That automatically means Shukri acknowledged and accepted Zeti’s denial despite the fact that it contradicted what he entered in the 2015 paper.
Is that not solid enough evidence that either the 2015 paper was fabricated or a conspiracy to do Najib in existed?
Why did the Attorney-General’s Chambers not make any effort to notify the Prime Minister of the contradiction?
Was Tommy Thomas not made aware of the police report I lodged against him, Shukri and Zeti to highlight the contradiction and to seek investigations into a conspiracy to throw Najib under the bus?
Zeti’s denial followed a series of police reports, press conferences and media exposes in which I made public her role in the RM2.6 billion transfer and pressured her into responding to the allegations I made against her (watch PC below).
As a matter of fact, right after Shukri opened his mouth following his appointment as MACC chief, I lodged a police report seeking investigations into a possible conspiracy involving him and Zeti to throw Najib under the bus (watch PC below).
Ironically, after more than a year since that report, I may have to lodge yet another given the recent PC in which Shukri spoke of his “job being done” and the “promise (he made) to Tun.”
“I can’t tell what more the public wants. I think I have done it all, so what else the public wants from me?
“So I have done my best until my exit, I exited with good intentions actually, to fulfil my promise with Tun. So there is no bad intention, and I have never quarrelled with Tun or political leaders about cases, never,” he said.
Shukri was referring to cases investigated during his tenure as MACC chief and emphasised on those involving 1MDB and the former 1MDB-unit, SRC International Sdn Bhd.
That raises a couple of questions:
1. Is Shukri saying that his decision to probe 1MDB and SRC was at Mahathir’s behest, that he was appointed solely to drag Najib to court on charges of corruption and power abuse related to SRC?
2. Is Shukri trying to say that Zeti is off the hook, that the contradiction brought about by her denial (see above) and the content of the 2015 paper is not being investigated?
3. Will Shukri be investigated on suspicion that he fabricated the 2015 paper?
4. Does this mean that the MACC has closed the file on the RM90 million Najib was accused of paying PAS ‘top echelons’ using money stolen from 1MDB?
5. Does this also mean that my report to the MACC regarding the possible bribe Dato’ Ambiga Sreenevasan received to falsely implicate Hadi and PAS of receiving RM90 million from Najib was never investigated?
6. Has the MACC marked the file on Ambiga that was opened following the report I lodged against her NFA?
7. Has the MACC also marked the file on Dato’ Rameli Musa that was opened following the report I lodged against the Keretapi Tanah Melayu Berhad (KTMB) Chairman NFA?
8. Does this mean the MACC closed the file on allegations that Dato’ Seri Abdul Hadi Awang paid Clare RM1.4 million to settle a lawsuit out of court?
9. Can we conclude that the MACC agrees Hadi never paid Clare RM1.4 million and that the content of my report is true, i.e., Rameli conspired (knowingly or not-knowingly) with Clare, Bank Negara, Maybank and lawyer Americk Sidhu to launder RM1.4 million into the United Kingdom by misleading the Central Bank of London?
10. Can we also conclude that Najib never paid Hadi or anyone from PAS RM90 million using money stolen from 1MDB?
11. Can I safely say that Ambiga is a pukka criminal who deserves to be investigated by the MACC on the likelihood that she was incentivised to throw Hadi and Najib under the bus?
RJ RITHAUDEEN
RELATED ARTICLES:
https://www.thethirdforce.net/mahathir-takut-dedahkan-laporan-cep-kerana-ingin-lindungi-zeti-akhtar-aziz-dan-shukri-abdull/
Shukri, Zeti dicabar saman NGO isu palsu siasatan RM2.6 billion
Zeti may have conspired with Ambank to sabotage Najib and 1MDB
Part 2: Proof that Zeti and Ambank officials knew the identities of the RM2.6 billion donors
