1MDB has indicated that it would be unable to repatriate US$1.83 billion in funds as demanded by Bank Negara.
This is because the funds have either been spent or earmarked for a debt transfer.
"The overseas investments of US$1.83 billion relates to historic equity and murabaha loan investments in a joint venture with PetroSaudi in 2009 – 2011, that was eventually converted in September 2012 into fund units valued at US$2.318 billion.
"As previously explained by 1MDB to Bank Negara, this sum of US$2.318 billion has been redeemed in 2014 and 2015, with proceeds being substantially utilised.
"The remaining US$940 million of fund units, are guaranteed by Aabar and have been ear-marked for a 'debt for asset swap' with its 'AA' rated parent, IPIC, as part of the 1MDB rationalisation plan," it said in a statement tonight.
Despite 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) indicating that it is unable to repatriate US$1.83 billion in funds, DAP parliamentarian Tony Pua believes the company has the assets to do so.
“1MDB has the assets to repatriate US$1.83 billion and must do so immediately to comply with the Bank Negara Malaysia directive,” he said in a statement today.
1MDB was ordered to repatriate the funds after Bank Negara revoked three permissions granted to 1MDB under the Exchange Control Act 1953 (ECA) for investments abroad, totalling US$1.83 billion (about RM7.5 billion at the current exchange rate).
Pua however said 1MDB does not seem to understand that Bank Negara has issued a direct order to execute the repatriation of funds, and is no longer merely seeking an explanation.
“It means that 1MDB has to, by all means necessary, including the disposal of 1MDB’s overseas assets or even terminating existing agreements, to comply with the directive.
“When the police issues a warrant of arrest for you, you don’t give the excuse that you have already explained the alleged crime to the police and therefore you don’t have to turn yourself in.
“Similarly, when Bank Negara issues a directive for the repatriation, you don’t respond by telling the Bank, ‘sorry, I’ve used up the money’," said Pua.
1MDB in a statement yesterday responded to Bank Negara saying it could not repatriate the funds because the funds have either been spent or earmarked for a debt transfer.
'Whither annual report's listed assets?'
Pua, citing 1MDB's March 2014 financial statement, said it was clear that the company has RM13.34 billion of “available for sale” investments held overseas.
“That represents US$3.6 billion of 'available for sale' assets held overseas.
"That means that even if it is true that 1MDB has actually used up all of the US$2.318 billion as claimed, there is still a balance of US$1.282 billion which can be repatriated.
“Why isn’t 1MDB repatriating this money? Is it because it is missing too?" he asked.
As for 1MDB’s claim that the US$2.318 billion was “substantially utilised”, Pua said this must be challenged as the sum was never redeemed, contrary to 1MDB’s disclosure in the 2014 financial statements and its press statement in January this year.
“As I have highlighted previously, and never disputed by 1MDB, the company has been involved in a round-tripping exercise to hide the fact that the US$2.318 billion of investment in Cayman Islands was merely a cover for missing funds.
“1MDB had even doctored its 2014 financial statements to its lending banks to claim that 1MDB has ‘substantially set aside’ the above redemptions ‘for the purposes of debt interest payments, working capital and payments to Aabar’, when the Deloitte audited report stated that the funds have been ‘substantially utilised’."
'Treating Bank Negara with contempt'
Urging 1MDB to "stop treating Bank Negara with contempt" by giving “unacceptable and irrelevant excuses”, Pua said the company must take all necessary steps to comply with the directive from the top financial services sector enforcement authority in the country.
“1MDB must hence seek the first available opportunity to meet Bank Negara to present its plans on how part, if not all, of the US$1.83 billion can be repatriated back to the country.
“The refusal to comply means the board of directors and top executives of 1MDB are in breach of both the Exchange Controls Act 1953 and the Financial Services Act 2013."
Pua added that Bank Negara will thus have no option but to seek the prosecution of these officials based on this latest attempt to break the law. - mk
BNM can now sue 1MDB for US$5.5bn
Bank Negara batal kebenaran, minta 1MDB pulangkan RM7.53 bilion ke Malaysia...
Dalam satu kenyataan, bank pusat itu berkata ia turut meminta 1MDB untuk membawa balik jumlah tersebut ke Malaysia dan mengemukakan kepada Bank Negara perancangannya berkaitan perkara itu.
Di bawah siasatannya, Bank Negara berkata ia merumuskan kebenaran yang diberikan di bawah ECA bagi pelaburan 1MDB di luar negeri adalah berdasarkan pendedahan maklumat relevan yang dikehendaki Bank Negara semasa membuat penilaian terhadap permohonan 1MDB itu.
Bagaimanapun, didapati maklumat yang diberikan adalah sama ada tidak tepat atau tidak lengkap.
"Sebagai pihak berkuasa siasatan, Bank Negara bertanggungjawab untuk menjalankan siasatan pada tahap profesional yang paling tinggi dan terperinci. Bank Negara menghendaki pendedahan maklumat yang tepat dan lengkap setiap masa apabila mempertimbangkan sebarang permohonan di bawah ECA," katanya.
Sebagai hasil daripada siasatan, Bank Negara berkata, ia mencadangkan peguam negara melaksanakan pendakwaan jenayah terhadap 1MDB di atas kesalahan di bawah ECA.
"Perlu diketahui di bawah Perlembagaan Persekutuan, keputusan untuk memulakan sesuatu pendakwaan jenayah terletak sepenuhnya pada peguam negara," katanya.
Bank Negara berkata ia akan terus memberi kerjasama penuh kepada siasatan yang sedang dijalankan oleh Polis Diraja Malaysia dan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia. - tmi
Dalam ertikata lain 1MDB telah melakukan jenayah kerana mendapatkan kebenaran melabur di luar negara dengan kenyataan palsu,akhirnya Bank negara membatalkan kebenaran tersebut, kenapa pula peguam negara kata tiada bukti kesalahan?
Rakyat nak tau apa alasan AG kata tiada kes, sedangkan ianya bersalahan dengan akta BNM.
BNM had submitted its papers to the AGC on 21 August. The evidence of wrongdoings at 1MDB could have been so clear cut that the Bank must have been under an expectation that the AG would do the natural thing and press charges. Instead, the AG sat on the matter over 3 weeks (Sept 11) and returned the cause papers marked NFA. Now the question on everyone's mind is this...why did the AG not make a public announcement at the material time that it did not find any wrongdoing at 1MDB and the matter was NFA?
The full statement issued by BNM on Friday, 9 Oct 2015
Bank Negara Drops Atomic Bomb On Najib's And Apandi Ali's Head and directs 1MDB to bring back US$1.83b from overseas...
Note the following:
"..under the Federal Constitution, the decision to initiate criminal prosecution lies solely with the Attorney General."
In other words it is Apandi Ali who is not doing his job. Dont try to blame it on Bank Negara Malaysia.
the Bank is duty bound to conduct its investigations with the highest professional care and diligence
In other words, Apandi Ali's contention that there was insufficient evidence or that there was no new evidence is bullshit. This is not a "kes curi itek" in the kampong ok.
Apandi Ali is not an expert on banking regulations. As the Government's sole banking and financial regulator, BNM is the technical expert on banking laws, financial regulations and the compliance or breach thereof. Not Apandi Ali. Bank Negara Malaysia knows what they are talking about and what they are doing.
the Bank concluded that permissions required under the ECA for 1MDB’s investments abroad were obtained based on inaccurate or without complete disclosure of material information
This is not a subjective matter, ie subject to interpretation, debate or argument.
Merriam Webster says that the word 'inaccurate' is also synonymous with "false, incorrect, untrue, untruthful, wrong". I hope Apandi Ali knows what is Merriam Webster.
If 1MDB had submitted information which Bank Negara in their expert opinion believed was "false, incorrect, untrue, untruthful, wrong" then that was a crime. That is why Bank Negara had recommended criminal charges in Court against 1MDB.
the Bank has revoked three permissions granted to 1MDB under the ECA for investments abroad totalling USD1.83 billion and also issued a direction under the Financial Services Act 2013 to 1MDB to repatriate the amount of USD1.83 billion to Malaysia
So Bank Negara Malaysia had already revoked permissions granted to 1MDB for investments abroad totalling USD1.83 billion (RM7.57 billion).
Permission granted by whom? According to the Kway Teow seller, by the Minister of Finance.
BNM had also asked 1MDB to bring back the USD1.83 billion which UNTIL today 1MDB has NOT done. This is a super clear breach of Malaysia's financial regulations. So 1MDB has broken the law. This is not subject to interpretation, argument or debate.
Under the powers vested in Bank Negara, which is the Government's own banking and financial regulator, they had revoked whatever permissions granted to 1MDB.
There is no more argument. 1MDB did not comply.
Bank Negara even told 1MDB "to repatriate the amount of USD1.83 billion to Malaysia" and gave 1MDB time "to submit a plan to the Bank for this purpose"
All this - 1MDB did not do and has not done until today. That is breaking the law.
Not having any experience running the AG's Chambers or perhaps not properly understanding the expert role of Government regulatory bodies like Bank Negara Malaysia, Apandi Ali still went ahead and did what was expected of him as the "brand new jatuh dari langit, kita semua tahu pasai apa" Attorney General of Malaysia.
Hence Apandi Ali's predicament today. He is certainly the laughing stock of the AG's Chambers, of Bank Negara Malaysia and the whole country.
What a way to cap a career. - syedsoutsidethebox
BNM revokes approvals for 1MDB's RM7.5b fund transfers
Dr M: M'sia a pariah state due to 1MDB issue...
The ex-premier was referring to the arrest of his former political secretary, lawyer Matthias Chang under the Security Offences (Special Measures) Act for accompanying his client Khairuddin Abu Hassan in lodging complaints against 1MDB abroad.
Mahathir’s scathing statement also comes after attorney-general Apandi Ali cleared 1MDB officials of wrongdoing despite Bank Negara Malaysia calling for action.
“In the eyes of the world Malaysia has become a pariah state, a state where anyone can be hauled up and questioned by the police, detained and charged through abusing the laws of the country.
“And the AGs Chambers will dismiss or disregard any report of wrongdoing that involves the prime minister,” he said in a blog posting.
“Already the members of the government are saying that no one, not even the rulers may comment on obvious Government abuses of the laws of the country.”
Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi yesterday said no one can push for the 1MDB probe to be hastened and delayed, as the probe must be guided by law.
Zahid said this in response to the Conference of Rulers’ decree for the 1MDB probe to be wrapped up and for wrongdoers, if any, to be punished.
Apandi is not a judge
Mahathir said Apandi’s (photo) decision to not prosecute the 1MDB officials, despite Bank Negara Malaysia’s (BNM) appeal, is premature.
He said while the AG has powers to decide whether or not to prosecute, he should not have dismissed BNM’s investigation given the weight of the matter.
The 1MDB case, he said, is linked to a sitting prime minister.
Instead, Mahathir said, the matter should have been brought to court to be decided upon by a judge.
“Is this the rule of law that this country is supposed to uphold? Is the AG higher than a judge, that his judgement is final and there can be no appeal?” he asked.
“By dismissing this case suspicions will remain in the minds of the people.
In fact people are thinking that the decision of the AG may not be by the AG.”
The Bank Negara investigation was carried out under paragraph (4)(b) of Part 1 of the Fifth Schedule to the Exchange Control Act 1953 namely, knowingly or recklessly making a statement which is false in a material particular.
This is in relation to the transfer of funds beyond RM500,000.
The Attorney-General’s Chambers said it found no reason to prosecute, but did not say why.
In a separate statement, anti-corruption NGO C4 urged the AG to reveal why the case was not brought to court.
"AG Appandi cannot simply put a lid on the 1MDB investigations without providing Malaysians with full details on how he arrived at such a decision," C4 director Cynthia Gabriel said.
It also called on the Auditor-General to reveal its preliminary report on 1MDB and a halt on harrassment on whistleblower. - mk