Save Selangor

Save Selangor

Friday, February 24, 2012

Retracing back the steps

It seems that all my previous exposé have fallen to deaf ears. Ever since my exposé started and ever since the NFC “Scandals” exposed by Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Strategic Director Rafizi Ramli and PKR Womens Wing Chief & Ampang Member of Parliament , Y.B. Zuraida Kamaruddin, SPRM have been put on the spotlight quite often. If my information is correct, it has been more than 6 months since the case first surface and known to SPRM and more than 2 months since my first exposé last late November 2011. But until today no concrete actions have seen being taken by the authorities against the people that I’ve named in my exposé. As such, I will stop implicating more parties for a while and instead I will try my best to disclose more intimate details of my previous exposé in case the authorities failed to obtain these documents or overlook certain aspect of the investigation. 


It also seems that I’ve make a quite a number of people uneasy and at unrest with my writing. On the Barisan Nasional (BN) side, I’ve been labeled as a tool for the Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and that I’ve been used for PR own advantages for the next upcoming 13th General Election. On the PR side, I’ve been called as “A BN made traps” or “Perangkap Ciptaan Barisan Nasional” (here), stating that I might expose several PR leaders on their own misconduct. 


IT SEEMS THAT EVERYONE HAS A SKELETON HIDDEN IN THEIR CLOSETAS I’VE MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, IT IS IMMATERIAL IF THIS BLOG IS POLITICAL MOTIVATED OR ALIGNED. THIS BLOG OR I CAN BE A FOE OR AN ALLY; IT IS UP TO THEM TO DECIDE.

I would not stand still anymore and let those in power let it be BN or PR to ridicule me and the rest of the Rakyat and jeopardizing the future of our next generation by practicing bribery, misappropriation, corruption and cheating the Rakyat’s monies.

Let’s turn up the heat up by a notch against the five individuals that I’ve named previously. Please bear with me as this chapter of the exposé is going to be quite lengthy. As usual, I’m evoking The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711, gazette on 10 June 2010 for myself, my sources and informers. ALL INFORMATION DISCLOSE HERE IS NOT MEANT TO SLANDER ANYONE OR TARNISH THEIR IMAGE BUT I’M JUST STATING THE FACT AS IT IS AND THE IMPROPER CONDUCT OF THOSE IN IT. NO EVIDENCE HAVE BEEN FABRICATED, ALL DOCUMENTS ARE AS REAL AS IT CAN BE, as admitted by Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin and Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman. Out of five individuals that I’ve named here in my blog, only one of them have come forward, while one sent a representative and the other three remain silent including the “contributor” Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil.

A Tangled Web
STEP 1-1 : PRELUDE (SENATOR DATO’ DR. AWANG ADEK HUSSIN)

To turn up the heat, I need to bring the spotlight onto a new player. Not a person or an individual but a sub division or rather a committee. The Skim Jejak Jaya Bumiputera (SJJB) is a sub division of the Ministry of Finance of Malaysia. It was first established in 2007. The idea of forming SJJB came from Y.A.B. Dato’ Haji Seri Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak the Deputy Prime Minister back then. Y.A.B. Dato’ Seri Haji Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak was also the first Chairman for the SJJB until now. Its objective is to assist Bumiputera companies to be listed in the Bursa Malaysia. It is also THE COMMITTEE TO INITIATE ALL MAJOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACT AWARDS as informed by a trustworthy source.

It is well known that Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin is Deputy Finance Minister. It is also well known that he is the UMNO Chief of Bachok and an UMNO High Council Member. All this is very well known fact known by the general public. But few are aware that SENATOR DATO’ DR. AWANG ADEK HUSSIN IS ALSO THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SJJB WORKING COMMITTEE (I believe it was since he was appointed as Deputy Minister of Finance in 2009), WHOM HAPPENS TO CHAIR ALL MAJOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACT AWARD MEETINGS AS THE WORKING COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN OF SJJB. 


Previously Senator Dato Dr Awang Adek Hussin has mentioned that as a Deputy Finance Minister he has nothing to do with project award (here). That statement is only the “HALF TRUTH”. AS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SJJB WORKING COMMITTEE, HE HAS ALL THE RIGHT TO INNITIATES AND MAKES “RECOMMENDATIONS” ON ANY MAJOR GOVERNMENT CONTRACT AWARDS. That is the other “HALF TRUTH”. He has everything to do with the Johor Bahru Sentral project award. Otherwise why would he make a site visit to Bangunan Sultan Iskandar and Johor Bahru Sentral on 02/12/2010 as I’ve stated previously (here). Although in the official Media Statement only stated that reason being for his site visit is to monitor the progress of the Medium Term Link to Bangunan Sultan Iskandar (this is yet another exposé in the writing), the chronology of events that follows suit after his site visit is highly questionable.

Puan Sri Zaitun Zawiyah Puteh
Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin statement that he had received the “contributions” from Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil for the people’s program in Bachok (here), contradicts with the SPRM Advisory Panel Chairman Puan Sri Zaitun Zawiyah Puteh statement, that all political financing to be credited directly into the respective party’s account, instead of individuals (here).SENATOR DATO’ DR. AWANG ADEK CLAIMS on the monies that he received from Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil for the people’s program in Bachok IS UTTERLY AND SIMPLY FULL OF CRAPS.

A former SPRM advisory panel member, Tan Sri Datuk Robert Phang Miow Sin (whom was once alleged of trying to bribe a Secretary General of a Ministry, later then call it quits from SPRM advisory panel (here so that SPRM may conduct an investigation thoroughly without any pressure and interference from himself), has also issue a statement (here) advising Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin to resign from his post so SPRM may conduct a thorough investigation against Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin on 17 January 2012.   Earlier on 31 December 2011, in another statement, Tan Sri Robert Phang Miow Sin have issued a more thought-provoking statement (here).  Let me quote and highlight some of his statements (I strongly urged all readers to read the entire content here so I will not be accused of taking something out of context).
Tan Sri Robert Phang Miow Sin


Start Quote:

“13. Let me ask Awang Adek, if he is not the Deputy Finance Minister whether these companies and associates would give him those monies to fund his political programs. THE CASE OF DATO’ HARUN IDRIS IS ON POINT. That makes it clear that Awang Adek had accepted gratification as defined by s. 16 MACC Act:  

16. Offence of accepting gratification
Any person who by himself, or by or in conjunction with any other person
(a)       Corruptly solicits or receives or agrees to receive for himself or for any other person; or
(b)       corruptly gives, promises or offers to any person whether for the benefit of that person or of another person, any gratification as an inducement to or a reward for, or otherwise on account of
A.    any person doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction, actual or proposed or likely to take place; or
B.    any officer of a public body doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction, actual or proposed or likely to take place, in which the public body is concerned,
commits an offence.

14. As a Minister, Awang Adek is a public officer. Thus, his acceptance of such monies into his personal account constitutes bribery:

21. Bribery of officer of public body
Any person who offers to an officer of any public body, or being an officer of any public body solicits or accepts, any gratification as an inducement or a reward for –
(a)       the officer voting or abstaining from voting at any meeting of the public body in favour of or against any measure, resolution or question submitted to the public body;
(b)       the officer performing or abstaining from performing or aiding in procuring, expediting, delaying, hindering or preventing the performance of, any official act;
(c)        the officer aiding in procuring or preventing the passing of any vote or the granting of any contract or advantage in favour of any person; or
(d)       the officer showing or forbearing to show any favour or disfavour in his capacity as such officer,
commits an offence, notwithstanding that the officer did not have the power, right or opportunity so to do, show or forbear, or accepted the gratification without intending so to do, show or forbear, or did not in fact so do, show or forbear, or that the inducement or reward was not in relation to the affairs of the public body.

15. Once Awang Adek admitted that he had accepted gratification, then there is a presumption that it is corrupt gratification:

50.  Presumption in certain offences.
(1) Where in any proceedings against any person for an offence under section 16, 17, 18, 20, 21, 22 or 23 it is proved that any gratification has been received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised, or offered, by or to the accused, the gratification shall be presumed to have been corruptly received or agreed to be received, accepted or agreed to be accepted, obtained or attempted to be obtained, solicited, given or agreed to be given, promised, or offered as an inducement or a reward for or on account of the matters set out in the particulars of the offence, unless the contrary is proved.

16. It is abundantly clear that the actions of Shahrizat and Awang Adek are not defensible. The MACC does itself discredit if it continuously refuse to act with the same speed and efficiency when it involve members of the ruling party. The Rakyat is tired of excuses. In the interest of the BN Government, Shahrizat and Awang Adek should resign and offer themselves for investigation by MACC and other authorities. By resigning, only then can investigations against them be done without the undue influence which cannot be the case if they remain in the Cabinet.”

End Quote.

I might have missed out Tan Sri Robert Phang Miow Sin statements earlier as it seems that both of us shared the same view on the late Dato’ Harun Idris graft charges back in 1976 and its similarity with Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin case.

I’m most certain that Tan Sri Datuk Robert Phang Miow Sin is someone very much familiar with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission Act 2009, Act 694, gazette on 8 January 2009 (herefor him to make such statement and to quote several Sections of the MACC Act 2009.

Now here is the part that I like the most. Let’s have a look at another documented evidence. This document or “Payment Voucher” PV No. 7518/10 dated 06/12/2010 for Cheque No 875977 and 875978 will show that the receiver is “Unknown” except for a stick on notes that stated “Ahli Parlimen Bachok” (although Senator Dato' Dr. Awang Adek Hussin is no longer the Member of Parliament of Bahcok) and the "Description" of the payment is meant for Public Relations. 

AMPMSB Payment Voucher PV No. 7518/10
 Few questions could be raised from this document alone. 

  1. Why was the “Payable To” section left blank? 
  2. Why was the actual “Payable To” as in “Ahli Parlimen Bachok” put on a stick on notes in which can be removed from the file easily, leaving the transaction almost untraceable by the naked eye? 
  3. In the “Description” column and in the “Accounts Title”, it states “Public Relations”. If it was surely for Public Relations, again, why omits the name of the receiver in the “Payable To” section? 
  4. Why would the “contribution” be given to Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin in such secrecy manner if the intention is for a public program? 
  5. Why would the “contribution” be given to Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin in the first instance? Why not some other Deputy Minister or Minister?

As a closing argument for Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin case, a STEADY MONTHLY “CONTRIBUTION” RECEIVED FROM ONE SOURCE SEEMS VERY ODD AND HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS if it were meant to be use for the people programs at Bachok Parliament constituent especially when the “contribution” is credited directly to one’s own personal account. A personal account should not been used by a public official for a public program. WHY ONLY AFTER MY EXPOSÉ YOU REVEALED THAT YOU ACCEPT MONIES FROM ANYONE FOR PUBLIC PROGRAMS IN "YOUR CONSTITUENCY"? WHY HAVE YOU NOT "ADVERTISE" THAT STATEMENT EARLIER SO THAT MORE PEOPLE CAN CONTRIBUTE TO YOUR PUBLIC PROGRAMS?I'm most certain that Malaysian are kind enough to donate if the money is to be use for the needy. I rest my case on Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin for now.


 Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin



Vs.
 Puan Sri Zaitun Zawiyah Puteh, SPRM Advisory Panel Chairman

Malay Mail, 19 January 2012, Thursday

Zaitun Zawiyah said the board had also called for political financing to be credited directly into the respective party’s account, instead of individuals’.

“This is because the donations are for party expenses, not individual expenses. The party account can subsequently be audited,” she said.

I’m very much certain that Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin did not have his personal account audited thoroughly by a professional and certified auditor. Thus how can he prove the money in his personal bank account is taken out and being used for public programs as he claimed.

Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin




Vs.
Tan Sri Datuk Robert Phang Miow Sin, Former SPRM Advisory Panel Member

Free Malaysia Today, 31 December 2011, Saturday

“In the case of Datuk Dr. Awang Adek, his open admission of having received such monies to fund his own “social” programs actually constitute political gratification. That an offence of corruption has been established could not be clearer. But most worrisome to me is the inability of Awang Adek, as our Finance Minister, to realise that what he had done was wrong. For him to justify his conduct spells doom for the country if our national finance is to be managed by a man of such moral fabric.” Tan Sri Robert Phang Miow Sin.

Spot on!!! You could not have said it better Tan Sri Phang.

STEP 2 : THE SECRETARY

The Deputy Prime Minister of MalaysiaY.A.B. Tan Sri Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd. Yassin, havecommented last 27th December 2011 (here) that he will conduct his own “investigation” on the alleged corruption (or as I prefer to called it “contributions”) against his Senior Private Secretary, Dato’ Mohd Shukor Abd Manan OR the exact word were “Saya akan meneliti perkara ini” during minute 00:18 of the video.  

IT HAS BEEN ALMOST 2 MONTHS SINCE THE STATEMENT WAS UTTERRED, AND YET THERE HAS BEEN NO CONCRETE ACTIONS TAKEN OR AT LEAST SEEMS TO BE TAKEN BY THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER, Y.A.B. TAN SRI HAJI MUHYIDDIN BIN MOHD YASSIN AGAINST HIS SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY, DATO’ MOHD SHUKOR ABD MANAN.

The statement was uttered by THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER OF MALAYSIA. Technically speaking, he is the 2nd most powerful man in Malaysia and yet THE DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER HAVE FAILED TO “INVESTIGATE” HIS OWN AIDE thoroughly and take actions accordingly. The very least thing that he can do is suspense the aide pending an internal investigation and yet we have failed to see such action being taken.

Other than that there has been no absolutely whatsoever comment or statements uttered by either Dato’ Po’ad Jelani, Private Secretary to Prime Minister Y.A.B. Dato’ Haji Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak OR by Dato’ Mohd Shukor Abd Manan, Senior Private Secretary to Deputy Prime Minister Y.A.B. Tan Sri Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd. Yassin. There is also no comment or statement issued out publicly by the Prime Minister of MalaysiaY.A.B. Dato’ Haji Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak on the “contributions” received by his aide.

Let’s hope that SPRM does not bow to any political pressure from Prime Minister Y.A.B. Dato’ Haji Mohd Najib Bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak or Deputy Prime Minister Y.A.B. Tan Sri Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd. Yassin or any political quarters in the investigation against those aides. It would be a shame if SPRM hands are tied up due to any pressure from the Prime Minister or Deputy Prime Minister or any political quarters. Or perhaps there is more than meet the eye? Is there any skeleton hidden in “THEIR” closet?

Or is it never been open?


STEP 3 : THE UNKNOWN CONCORD (DATO’ SRI AZALINA OTHMAN)

A “Classic” Car worth RM 300,000.00. Seems very reasonable indeed. Let me show the “Classic” Car to you.

Is this "Classic" Car worth RM 300,000.00???

Seems like the car is in pristine condition. What about the interior? Is it well preserved or is it in pristine condition as well as the exterior. I’m not much of a classic car enthusiast, but I would recon any “Classic” Car would be very expensive especially if all the parts are the restored originals i.e. the radio, the dashboard, the speedometer, the steering wheel, console box, etc. The “Classic” Car was previously owned by Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman according to few sources the 1967 Mercedes Benz 280SL as stated hereOR 1969 Mercedes Benz 280SL as stated hereIt was sold for RM 300,000.00 to the “new owner” Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil, as stated by Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman Media Officer, Zulkifli Mat Rawi.

I got a few rhetorical question to ask Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman (perhaps this time she will answer it herself).


  1. When did Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman purchase the “Classic” Car and from who? 
  2. What is the “Classic” Car Vehicle Registration Number (the photograph was censored as shown in the News Straits Times)? 
  3. How did Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman bought the “Classic” Car purchases in the first instance? Cash or Loan? 
  4. If CASH, where did the CASH come from? 
  5. If LOAN, which financial institution gave Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina the loan? 
  6. When did the “Classic” Car was sent to PUSPAKOM for inspection (i.e. to verify the engine number and chassis number) prior selling it to Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil?  Or when was PUSPAKOM B2 report generated? What is the report number of the B2 report? 
  7. When did the transfer of the “Classic” Car ownership did took place from Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman to Dato’ Yahaya Abd Jalil?  

    According to Road Transportation Act 1987, Act 333, gazette on 24 September 1987, Section 13,Procedure on change of possession of motor vehicles, clearly states that “The registered owner shall, within seven days after such change of possession, forward to the Director of a registration area a statement in the prescribed form, and shall deliver to the new possessor or the new owner the registration certificate relating to the motor vehicle and, unless he is surrendering the license under section 19,the license.”

    The 
    Road Transportation Act 1987 can be found here and JPJ FAQ on the matter can be found here.

  8. What are the chassis number and the engine number of the “Classic” Car?

    The chassis number and the engine number stated in the PUSPAKOM B2 report must be exactly the same as the one that is stated in the Vehicle Ownership Grant.
     
  9. What was the actual year the “Classic” Car was manufactured?There seems to be contradicting statements publish by the news.

  10. “Two years ago, when she was minister, she bought a classic Mercedes Benz 280SL (1969). It was her hobby. But then she realized that maintaining such cars was quite expensive so she stopped this hobby and put out advertisements to potential buyers. In March last year, Yahya contacted her, and she sold it to him,” Zulkifli told FMT (here).  Could you please explain, what sort of maintenance did you do on the car that you classify it was expensive (or rather it was your Media Officer have classify it as expensive).
    There have been numerous reports (statements) of you owing several luxury cars or vehicle i.e. a Porsche Cayman S, Vehicle Registration Number WLV 3; a Land Rover (possibly Freelander), Vehicle Registration Number CCG 63; an Audi Q7, Vehicle Registration Number BCV 63; a Toyata Alphard, Vehicle Registration Number BJH 63; and a Smart Fortwo, Vehicle Registration Number BHM 63. So far I’ve yet to find any counter statements from your end about such issue, of not owing any of those mentioned cars. I would recon that should you indeed own all those cars or vehicle, the maintenance cost for i.e. a Porsche Cayman S would surely be much more expensive and that of the “Classic” Car Mercedes Benz 280SL. So do explain the “expensive” maintenance issue in depth to the people that voted for you in your constituency (Pengerang) and the rest of Malaysian. I think we all deserve that bit of truth.


  11. LAST BUT NOT LEAST, Y.B. DATO’ SRI AZALINA OTHMAN, DO YOU KNOW THE MARKET VALUE FOR YOUR “CLASSIC” CAR? I MEAN THE ACTUAL MARKET VALUE, TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THAT THE “CLASSIC” CAR IS IN SUCH “PRISTINE” CONDITION AND SUCH OF COURSE.
    “Dear” Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman, I have found several “Classic” Cars up for sale, of the same model and of the same year (either 1967 or 1969) and all in pristine condition. None of the “Classic” Cars have a tag price of RM 300,000.00 or even close to RM 200,000.00.

    Let me show yet another “document”. Well this “document” can be found on the Internet. This “document” will show that a Mercedes Benz SL280 (1969) was sold with a price tag of RM 188,000.00 and it is in a pristine condition (here). Not only that, this car have the same body paint color as the one that your Media Officer have shown to the New Straits Times. See the pictures below.

    This "Classic" Car worth only RM 188,000.00 (View 1)

    This "Classic" Car worth only RM 188,000.00 (View 2)
    This "Classic" Car worth only RM 188,000.00 (View 3)
    This "Classic" Car worth only RM 188,000.00 (View 4)

    This "Classic" Car worth only RM 188,000.00 (View 5)


    Wait, there is more. The car was first advertised or posted in the Internet on 05/03/2011 and believed to be sold as the owner of the post has updated it on 12/04/2011 which is 4 working days after Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil or AMPMSB issued a cheque “valued” at RM 300,000.00 in your name. See the pictures below. Talking about pure coincidence. 

    Online Advertorial for "Classic" Car For Sale RM 188,000.00 (Part 1)

    Online Advertorial for "Classic" Car For Sale RM 188,000.00 (Part 2)

With that being said, again here comes my favorite part. Let me disclose yet another document. This is among the few reasons that I decide to openly expose the fact that Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman received a “contributions” of RM 300,000.00 for a reason only known to the giver (bear in mind that the giver in this instance is AMPMSB and Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil is the “majority shareholder” and the Managing Director of the Company) and the receiver (Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman). Let’s have a closer look at the “Payment Voucher” PV No. 8069/11 dated 07/04/2011 for Cheque No. 872045 as shown below.

AMPMSB Payment Voucher PV No. 8069/11

Now, contradict to Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin payment voucher, the “Payable To” section clearly states “Azalina Bte Othman”. But have a closer look again in the “Description” section. It is being left blank. Have another look at the “Accounts Title” section; it states “Suspense Account”. Now have another look at the “Accounts Code” section ……. as in empty, blank, nada.Seem pretty weird and confusing to me.

To make my point much clearer, let me show yet another document or “Payment Voucher”. This“Payment Voucher” PV No. 7754/11 dated 24/01/2011 for Cheque No 876181 will show the “Payable To” is named to “Naza Motor Trading Sdn Bhd”, with “Description” detailed as “Purchase of Audi 2008” and “Accounts Title” categorize as “Amount due from/to – ICA” (ICA is yet another Company, if not too much for me to say, belonging to Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil) . With the exception to the “Accounts Title”, both “Payable To” and “Description” section is pretty straight forward and easily identifiable on who was the receiver and what was the payment for.   

AMPMSB Payment Voucher PV No. 7757/11
WHY WOULD THE PAYMENT TO DATO’ SRI AZALINA OTHMAN MADE IN SUCH SECRECY MANNER IF IT WAS REALLY MEANT FOR BUYING / PURCHASING A CAR?

I rest my case on Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman for now.

STEP 1-2 : PRELUDE (INTIMIDATION)

SOMEONE “HIGH”, A MINISTER, Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed has said (in a newspaper) that actions must be taken against bank officers who leaked information. Do you know my “Dear” Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed that by saying that actions must be taken against the bank officer who leaked information in this instance, is an act of cohort or abetting the improper conducts and even worse could be consider as intimidation against the whistleblower. YOU ARE SAYING THAT PEOPLE MUST NOT DIVULGE INFORMATION EVEN IF THE ACT IS HIGHLY SUSPICIOUS AND IMPROPER THUS ENCOURAGING SUCH CRIME TO BE COMMITTED.  Under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711, Section 6, Sub-Section 5, “any provision in any contract of employment shall be void in so far as it purports to preclude the making of a disclosure of improper conduct”, thus eliminates any “possible” actions being taken against the whistleblower by the employer.

The information that I’ve shown in my posting was first divulge to the authorities by yet another whistleblower under The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711 gazette on 10 June 2010. But after sometime, all seems as if the investigations have not actually being done. So would you blame the bank officers for “leaking” (I prefer to called it whistle-blowing) information? Or perhaps it was not them that leaked the information, perhaps it’s the authority? Perhaps someone whom have a high ‘conciseness’, and just could not take it anymore on all this crap of not investigating highly placed officials or ministers in power. Perhaps it was someone from a political party whom is always bickering amongst each other? WHOEVER IT WAS, THIS WHISTLEBLOWER (MY SOURCES AND INFORMERS) HAVE MY UTMOST RESPECT AND I SALUTE THEM. THEY SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR THEIR BRAVERY IN STANDING UP FOR THE TRUTH AND NOT BE INTIMIDATED JUST AS WHAT YOU HAVE DONE. Without them, none of this would be known to me or the public and also SPRM might just close one eye on this case.

Dato' Sri Mustapa Mohamed
Utusan Malaysia, 24/12/2011.

“If there is a bank officer that leaked information about this financial statements / secret, action should be taken against them”, Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed, Member Of Parliament Jeli, Kelantan.


This sort of statement as I said earlier can be considered as intimidation against the whistleblower.Such intimidation is clearly against The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711, under which gives full protection or immunity to the Whistleblower against civil and criminal actions and any detrimental act. The protection is not only meant for the Whistleblower themselves but it shall be extended to any person related to or associated with the Whistleblower. Perhaps Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed should think twice before making statements against my sources and informers. I have cited The Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711 in its fullest content, meant not only to protect myself, by also my sources and informers as well as for those that we loved and cared about. MY SOURCES, INFORMERS AND MYSELF BELIEVE THAT THE THINGS THAT I HAVE EXPOSED HERE ARE TO BE TRUE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. None of the documents being produced here are fabricated or falsify in anyway.  

The method of disclosure as stated under the Whistleblower Protection Act 2010, Act 711, Section 6, Sub-Section 3, can be done either orally or in writing. I and my sources and informers choose “writing” through this blog by which the authorities is monitoring it closely. Just imagine if we were to go directly to the authority i.e. SPRM, what will happen to us??? Even by being anonymous, we are being threaten in plain sight by those in the Public Office such as you “Dear” Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed, with utterly disregard of the law that is meant protect us. Perhaps Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed and those alike should be investigated under criminal intimidation under the Penal Code Act 574 or any other much more severe prevailing law (with much more severe punishment) and action being taken accordingly. Here I would like to request for someone lodge a police report against Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed for me and my fellow whistleblower for the “intimidation” against us?


Dato’ Sri Mustapa Mohamed

“….actions should be taken against them.”

Do you have a skeleton hidden in your closet as well and for that you are backing up your fellow politicians? Why only Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin being backed up? Why not backed up Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman as well? I’ve yet to hear or read your statement pertaining to Y.B. Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman received “contributions”.




Vs.
 The Whistleblower 711

I have to remain anonymous to protect not only myself but also my sources and informers and our loved ones. We are treading on thin water. There are rumors that there are bounties have been put on me by certain quarters. Yet the authorities still are not taking actions with so much incriminating evidence been divulge and confiscated. As such being anonymous is the only save heaven that I and my fellow whistleblower have at the moment.


 CONCLUSION

It seems that Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil is too POWERFUL and too WELL CONNECTED with the “right” people. He seems to be INVINCIBLE and UNTOUCHABLE from any concrete actions by the authorities. So far it has been more than 2 months since my first exposé but yet no single concrete or tangible actions been taken against Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil, Senator Dato’ Dr. Awang Adek Hussin, Dato’ Po’ad Jelani, Dato’ Mohd Shukor Abd Manan and Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman.

SPRM Need To Unravel the Tangled Web & Act Swiftly


“THERE WILL BE NO JUSTICE, THERE WILL BE NO GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE, BY THE PEOPLE, AND FOR THE PEOPLE, AS LONG AS THE GOVERNMENT AND ITS OFFICIALS PERMIT BRIBERY IN ANY FORM.” JOHN JAY HOOKER.


Dato’ Yahya Abd Jalil
Have “Contributed” Up To  RM 750,000.00 as of May 2011

No direct statement yet!!!


“The company's public relations manager, Jaleel Abdul Rashid, later told the NST that Yahya refused to comment on the matter.”

Perhaps in time like this, it is better to be INVISIBLE than INVINCIBLE.



Received as of May 2011 - RM 120,000.00.

Utusan Malaysia, 22 December 2011, Thursday

“There are many companies and individuals that gives donation to me so that I can run things or programs for the people of Bachok. Many have donated through that account. I have the record of the donations including who are the giver and the recipient of the contributions. I also have a dedicated officer to look after that account.

Principally, there are peoples that contributed. There is no problem for anyone to donate. Except for those with personal interest i.e. to gain a contract. As a Deputy Minister, I have nothing to do with contract awards.” Senator Dato Dr. Awang Adek Hussin.

If I’m not mistaken this is similar to the 1976 graft case of the late Dato’ Seri Harun Idris former Menteri Besar of Selangor (1964-1976).
Senator Dato’ Dr Awang Adek Hussin



Dato’ Po’ad Jelani

Received as of May 2011 - RM 170,000.00.

No statements yet!!!

Cat got your tongue???


Received as of May 2011 - RM 160,000.00.

No statement yet from the man himself!!! Instead his Boss were the one that issue out a statement.

The Star Online TV, 27 December 2011, Tuesday

“Saya akan meneliti perkara ini”, The Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia,Y.A.B. Tan Sri Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd. Yassin.

Well, Y.A.B. Tan Sri Haji Muhyiddin bin Mohd Yassin, please let the general public know of your “investigation” against your aide as you have so boldly let the general public knows that you will conduct your very own “investigation”. I’m most certain that everyone is very anxious to hear the outcome of your “investigation”.

Dato Mohd Shukor Abd Manan



 YB Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman
Received as of May 2011 - RM 300,000.00.

No direct statement yet!!! A proxy was sent on her behalf to explain the situation.

Free Malaysia Today, 18 January 2012, Wednesday
                         
“There is no corruption. To say it is conflict of interest is wrong. No such thing. Plus, she was not a minister then, and had no capability to offer any projects. Secondly, she is not an Umno national leader and has no other position other than Pengerang Umno head. She has, and had, nothing to offer the businessman,” Zulkifli Mat Rawi, Media Officer of Dato’ Sri Azalina Othman.

She might not have anything to offer as a Minister or Deputy Minister, but she is still Pengerang Member of Parliament. “Perhaps” she is offering a piece of the cake on the Refinery and Petrochemical Integrated Development RAPID project that kick off last May 2011 (here) which is being built right at her constituency and worth more than RM 50,000,000,000.00 (Billions). Perhaps there is more than meet the eye. It is just too tempting to speculate this as the “contributions” was given just weeks before the announcement on RAPID made by the Prime Minister of Malaysia. Perhaps it is just a speculation. I have no intention in slandering anyone here, but stating only the “Perhaps”, and “Perhaps” the authorities should also investigate this “Perhaps” lead. This is all just “Perhaps” of course, and “Perhaps” it is just pure coincidence.


IT IS AN OFFENCE TO ACCEPT ANY GRATIFICATIONS. IT IS ALSO AN OFFENCE TO GIVE ANY GRATIFICATIONS. NOT ONLY ACTIONS SHOULD BE TAKEN AGAINST SENATOR DATO’ DR. AWANG ADEK, DATO’ PO’AD JELANI, DATO’ MOHD SHUKOR ABD MANAN AND DATO’ SRI AZALINA OTHMAN BUT ACTIONS MUST ALSO BE TAKEN TO THE GIVER DATO’ YAHYA ABD JALIL. 

WHAT IS THE ATTORNEY’S GENERAL CHAMBERS NEXT COURSE OF ACTION SHOULD THE AUTHORITIES HAVE FIND SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO PROSECUTE ALL THESE PEOPLE? WILL ALL THESE PEOPLE EVER BE PROSECUTED? IF YES, ARE THEY GOING TO BE CHARGED UNDER THE PENAL CODE JUST LIKE THE CASE OF DR. MOHAMED KHIR TOYO, WHERE THE MAXIMUM SENTENCES PUNISHABLE IS ONLY A FRACTION COMPARED TO MACC ACT 2009. THESE PEOPLE SHOULD BE CHARGED WITH THE MOST SEVERE PUNISHABLE SENTENCE AVAILABLE AS THEY ARE ABUSING THEIR POWERS AND THEIR POSITIONS FOR THEIR OWN GREED AND LUST.

I’ve chosen my medium of divulging information to the authorities i.e. SPRM as a whistleblower through this blog. I saw no other safe ways in bringing in the information to the authorities without my safety and those of my informers and sources and our loved ones being compromise. As I’ve mentioned in my first exposé, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Expect the unexpected. We might knew too much for our own safety. It is not my intention to withhold any information from the authorities at anytime, but I will put forth one by one after I’ve ascertain the credibility of the evidence that I’ve and after I believe that the authorities might not have sufficient evidence or simply could find more evidence. As I’ve said, this blog does not meant to slander anyone or tarnish their image, but only exposing the fact as it is. 

I’M ASKING EVERYONE TO THINK AND JOIN IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION. DON’T FOOL YOURSELF BY SAYING THAT THERE ARE OTHERS OUT THERE TO FIGHT THE FIGHT FOR YOU. DON’T ASK FOR OTHERS TO DO THE FIGHTING FOR YOU IF YOU YOURSELF ARE NOT READY TO FIGHT FOR THE CAUSE. FIGHT FOR A BETTER FUTURE FOR OURSELVES AND OUR FUTURE GENERATION. A FUTURE FREE FROM CORRUPTION AND MISAPPROPRIATION. FOR CORRUPTION IS THE ROOT OF THE DESTRUCTION OF A NATION. IT IS TIME TO WAKE FROM THE SLUMBER. IT IS TIME FOR EVERYONE TO JOIN IN THE FIGHT AGAINST CORRUPTION. BE HONEST TO YOURSELF FIRST BEFORE OTHERS. COULD YOU LOOK AT YOURSELF IN THE MIRROR EVERYDAY KNOWING THAT YOU HAVE INFORMATION AND EVIDENCE OF CORRUPTION DONE CERTAIN PEOPLE, AND YOU CHOOSE TO REMAIN SILENT JUST SO THAT YOU COULD RECEIVED THAT PAYCHECK AT THE END OF THE MONTH. EXPOSE THEM. EVEN IF IT IS THE PRIME MINISTER OR A LEADER THAT YOU IDOLIZE. IF THAT PERSON COULD ACCEPT GRATIFICATION ONCE, THEN THAT PERSON WILL DO IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN. THEN ANOTHER PERSON KNOWS ABOUT IT, AND SEEING THAT FIRST PERSON IS LIVING A COMFORTABLE LIFE THANKS TO THE GRATIFICATIONS, THE SECOND PERSON WILL FOLLOW SUIT SHOULD GREED TAKE OVER. THEN ANOTHER PERSON AND ANOTHER AND ANOTHER.  THERE WILL NO END OF IT UNLESS WE PUT A STOP ON IT OURSELVES. A RM 5,000.00 WORTH OF MERCHANDISE (JUST THE MERCHANDISE) WILL BE BILLED AS RM 15,000.00 PER PIECE. THE RM 10,000.00 DIFFERENCE WILL BE SPLIT AMONG THEMSELVES. THAT IS 200% EXCESSIVE SPENDING DONE UNNECESSARILY USING THE RAKYAT’S HARD EARN INCOME. YOU DECIDE FOR YOURSELF WHAT IS THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION. DON’T BLAME OTHERS FOR DOING THE RIGHT THING, BUT BLAME THE CULPRIT, THE GIVER AND THE TAKER OF SUCH GRATIFICATION.

Signing out for now.

 GTP??

Your Sincerely,



No comments: