CCTV RM3.5 juta di lokap jadi persoalan selepas serangan seks...
Ahli Parlimen Segambut Lim Lip Eng mahu penjelasan polis Kuala Lumpur berhubung keberkesanan sistem kamera litar tertutup (CCTV) bernilai jutaan ringgit yang dipasang di lokap Jinjang, berikutan dakwaan kes serangan seksual ke atas tahanannya, baru-baru ini.
Dalam kes itu, seorang anggota polis sedang disiasat atas dakwaan melakukan seks oral dengan kekerasan terhadap seorang budak lelaki berusia 15 tahun pada 10 April lalu.
Anggota itu juga disiasat kerana serangan seksual yang sama terhadap dua lagi remaja lelaki lain yang berusia 14 dan 16 tahun.
Lim berkata pemeriksaan perlu kerana lokap berkenaan telah dilengkapi Teknologi Pelaporan Analisis Pemantauan Sendiri (SMART) pada bulan Februari lalu yang bernilai RM3.5 juta dengan tujuan menghentikan penyeksaan, serangan seksual atau kematian dalam tahanan.
"Polis gagal menyatakan jika CCTV dipasang dan berfungsi semasa kejadian itu berlaku.
"Jadi untuk mengelakkan persepsi salah bahawa sistem SMART sebagai projek yang gagal, atau terdapat usaha untuk menutup kes, saya meminta Ketua Polis Kuala Lumpur Datuk Amar Singh untuk menganjurkan lawatan minggu ini kepada Ahli Parlimen Wilayah Persekutuan," katanya dalam satu kenyataan media.
Suspek berusia 27 tahun itu kini ditahan reman sehingga 15 April.
Beliau disiasat di bawah Seksyen 377C Kanun Keseksaan kerana melakukan persetubuhan yang bertentangan dengan aturan tabii tanpa kerelaan.
Jika didapati bersalah, suspek boleh dihukum penjara antara lima hingga 20 tahun dan tertakluk kepada sebat juga.- mk
Questions over RM3.5m lock-up CCTV project after sex assault
Macai2 UMNO saja percaya PAC bersihkan Najib...
Kalu baca Lapuran PAC dari muka surat ke muka surat kita tidak akan percaya Najib sudah bersih.Tapi Menteri2 dan macai2nya kata Najib tak terlibat dengan skandal 1MDB. Syarikat 1MDB hanya bermodal RM1 juta tapi boleh pinjam RM50 billion.
Antara perkara2 penting dalam laporan PAC...
1. Para pengarah tidak meluluskan pemindahan AS $ 700 juta kepada Good Star Limited pada tahun 2009. Jika demikian, apakah tindakan mereka tentang pemindahan haram itu?
2. Ernst dan Young dan KPMG telah digantikan selepas mereka berkeras mahu melihat dokumen2 mengenai beberapa urusan dana ini. Mengapa para pengarah akur dengan penamatan itu?
3. 1MDB membayar RM4.24 bilion (AS $1,367 bilion) kepada Aabar Investments PJS Ltd (Aabar Ltd) sebagai deposit keselamatan pada tahun 2012, tanpa kelulusan lembaga pengarah. Jadi, kenapa CEOnya tidak diminta menjelaskannya?
4. Lembaga pengarah telah bermesyuarat sebanyak lapan hingga 16 kali setahun dari 2009 hingga Ogos 2015 dan meluluskan 425 resolusi bertulis dalam tempoh yang sama. Apakah, pelaburan yang mencecah berbilion ringgit tidak pernah dibincangkan?
Dari Kiri Khadem Al Qubaisi,Mohamed Badawy al Husseiny,Najib dan Lodin Wok
Selepas pengumuman Laporan PAC di Parlimen, Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth fund – International Petroleum Investment Co.(IPIC)dan anak syarikatnya Aabar Investments PJS - tanpa membuang masa memaklumkan kepada Bursa Saham London bahawa mereka tidak pernah menerima AS$3.5 bilion dari 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). IPIC juga menyatakan bahawa mereka BUKAN pemilik Aabar BVI yang berdaftar di British Virgin Island.
Sedangkan 1MDB dengan tegas mengatakan bahawa pemindahan dibuat ke sebuah syarikat berdaftar Aabar PJS Limited di British Virgin Island selepas diberitahu firma itu adalah anak syarikat firma negeri IPIC(Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Investment Corporation).
1MDB berkata ia telah diberi jaminan ini oleh pengarah IPIC menguruskan Khadem Al Qubaisi dan CEO anak syarikat IPIC, Aabar,Mohamed Badawy al Husseiny.
Sementara itu, bank pusat United Arab Emirates telah memutuskan untuk membekukan aset Khadem Al Qubaisi, yang sebelum ini adalah Pengarah Urusan IPIC dan Aabar bekas Ketua Pegawai Eksekutif Mohamed Badawy Al Husseiny.
Mohamed Badawy al Husseiny dilaporkan sebagai pelabur utama di Red Granite, sebuah firma Hollywood dimiliki oleh anak tiri Perdana Menteri Najib Abdul Razak Riza Aziz.
Jumlah total yang dibayar kepada Aabar BVI ialah USD3.5 billion atau pada kadar tukaran USD1=RM4, bererti RM14 bilion telah lesap? Jadi siapa pemilik Aabar BVI?
Khadem Al Qubaisi dan Mohamed Badawy al Husseinyi, adalah kawan baik Jho Low dan Jho Low kawan baik Najib. Mengapa lapuran PAC tidak sebut perkara ini?
Apa kaitan Khadem Al Qubaisi dan Mohamad Badawy al Husseini dengan Jho Low sahabat baik Najib?
Walaupun urusniaga 1MDB digambarkan begitu murni oleh beberapa media, namun dana berjumlah AS $ 5.5 bilion tidak dapat dikesan oleh PAC kerana kekurangan dokumen.
Ia termasuk dakwaan bahawa sebanyak US$ 700 juta dan US$ 330 juta telah disalahgunakan untuk Good Star Limited, sebuah syarikat yang tidak mempunyai kaitan langsung dengan usaha sama 1MDB-PetroSaudi masing -masing pada 2009 dan 2011.
Kemana pergi pula RM4 billion yang dipinjam dari KWAP oleh SRC? Kumpulan Wang Persaraan (Diperbadankan)(KWAP) tidak bimbang berhubung dakwaan ketidak-upayaan firma SRC International untuk membayar balik pinjaman RM4 bilion yang diberikan kepada bekas anak syarikat 1MDB.Ini kerana, katanya pinjaman yang diberikan oleh KWAP dijamin oleh kerajaan.
5-6 negara luar sedang menyiasat Najib dan budak2 suruhan nya. Kesalahan yang disiasat termasuklah pengonglapan wang, penyaluran wang haram, pecah amanah dan salah laku jenayah yang lain.
Najib mungkin berjaya mengunci mulut rakyat Malaysia, tapi dia tidak akan mampu berbuat apa2 dengan negara luar.
Adakah Najib mahu rakyat Malaysia mengangkat senjata membelanya? Sooorriii... tak ada sapa teringin nak bantunya...
Wall Street fingerprints are all over 1MDB scandal
More disclosures, more shocks...
For a company which has been and still making headlines for the wrong reasons, 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) continues to be defiant in the aftermath of the report by Public Accounts Committee (PAC) which was tabled in Parliament last Thursday.
The name-calling has not ceased and the salvos fired at opposition lawmaker Tony Pua (who is also a PAC member) have not stopped. When Pua remarked that he was only "80 per cent" satisfied with the PAC report, the retort was "you can't be 80 per cent pregnant."
On Monday, Reuters reported from London that Abu Dhabi's state-owned International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) said neither itself nor its unit Aabar Investments PJS has any links to a British Virgin Islands-incorporated firm named in the PAC report.
"Both IPIC and Aabar confirm that Aabar BVI was not an entity within either corporate group," the news agency quoted IPIC saying in a statement on the London Stock Exchange, referring to Aabar Investments PJS Limited (Aabar BVI).
1MDB's retort and response was baffling indeed. It came out with its guns blazing (yet again). The company, it said, paid substantial sums to Aabar BVI and these payments have been recorded in the publicly available and audited financial statements.
"Accordingly, 1MDB finds it curious that IPIC and Aabar have waited until April 2016 to issue such a statement," it said.
1MDB also said that company records show documentary evidence of the ownership of Aabar BVI and of each payment made, pursuant to various legal agreements that were negotiated with Khadem Al Qubaisi in his capacity as managing director of IPIC and chairman of Aabar and or with Mohamed Badawy Al Husseiny, in his capacity as CEO of Aabar.
But what is public knowledge is that both these men left their posts suddenly and without explanation last year and 1MDB cannot claim to have no knowledge that the money did not reach IPIC or Aabar.
As early as September last year, the Financial Times reported that IPIC was trying to get to the bottom of an apparent US$1.4 billion mismatch in its dealings with 1MDB.
Citing people familiar with the case, the newspaper said IPIC was seeking clarification about the fate of the money, which 1MDB said it paid out but was never recorded as received in IPIC's own financial statements.
"IPIC's probe is part of a wider Abu Dhabi audit of the institution's long entanglement with 1MDB, which has come under growing scrutiny since corruption allegations engulfed both the Malaysian fund and Najib Razak, the country's embattled prime minister," the London-based pink-sheet reported.
So, what exactly is going on? Did 1MDB remit billions to a company which had no links with its joint-venture partner? Were the PAC members and Malaysians taken for a long expensive ride? Until the Reuters report emerged, Malaysians were convinced that they were given correct answers.
Not any more. The 1MDB saga has taken several twists and turns. Another significant weave has taken place which has put the company in yet another coil. It is no longer "stale" or "recycled information" – words which the company often uses when it chooses not to address issues.
First, is it not incumbent upon any company to check the audited accounts – the balance sheet and the P &; L statements – of any company it has dealings with.
Second, 1MDB failed to take all precautions including a due diligence exercise on the recipient of its funds.
Third, 1MDB does not want to acknowledge that it had been remitting monies to the wrong Aabar – unintentionally or otherwise. Shouldn't the board and the senior management be held accountable for such a major glitch for which taxpayers have to foot the bill?
Fourth, if IPIC and Aabar had not received the monies, where is it now? Who has "stolen" billions of ringgit from 1MDB?
Fifth and more importantly, what is 1MDB going to do? Is it going to write off these amounts (read billions) as bad debts and "move on" as some leaders have suggested?
(Many years ago, there was a company called Asia Motors – an authorised distributor of several brands of cars. Word had it then that an ingenious person set up a company called "Asian Motors" and opened a bank account in this name. He then diverted cheques payable to Asia Motors by adding the letter "n" to the word Asia.)
In the light of the revelations to the UK bourse, even the most ardent of 1MDB supporters will find it difficult to continue to swallow what 1MDB says in its media statements.
Now, it appears that Pua's claims have to be re-visited and taken seriously. Among others, he charged that RM7 billion in cash and assets overseas have not been verified. He also said that the auditor-general (AG) could not verify a sum of US$1.56 million of investments by 1MDB's wholly-owned foreign subsidiary – 1MDB Global Investment Ltd.
Putting it behind us and moving on is no longer an option. The theme of "destabilising the government and overthrowing the PM" is no longer applicable in the light of the latest revelations.
This is deceit, dishonesty and fraud perpetrated on the citizens of this country. Surely, our voices have to be heard by the powers that be. Blocking websites and accusing foreign media organisations with all kinds of conspiracy theories is not going to provide the answers to so many lingering questions.
For a start, why not de-classify the AG's report immediately instead of giving us the shocks and distressing news in instalments? - R.Nadeswaran,thesundaily.com
Guan Eng vs Rahman Dahlan...
Jangan pula tiba-tiba hilang nak ke luar negara
atas urusan negara nak cari sponsor...
cheers.
No comments:
Post a Comment