Tajudin Ramli has cited Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Nazri Abdul Aziz’s Aug 8 infamous letter last year, as a directive of a settlement by several government-linked corporations (GLCs) in a suit against him.

NONE Tajudin's appeal is scheduled for hearing at the Court of Appeal for the major portion of next week, where in his notice of motion, he sought an acknowledgment of a settlement to the dispute and also remove the existing GLCs’ lawyers.

In his notice of motion dated Feb 3, through his lawyers Lim Kian Leong, he claimed that the Malaysian government had agreed to a global settlement of all claims against the once-high flying former Malaysia Airlines chairperson.

“The continuation of the suit against the applicant (Tajudin) is frivolous, vexatious and an abuse of the court process,” said Lim in the notice of motion.

Tajudin had been ordered by the Kuala Lumpur High Court in 2009 to pay RM589 million to Pengurusan Danaharta Nasional Bhd, which manages the unpaid loans following the debt he had incurred in the purchase of MAS shares.

The RM589 million sum owed is after discounts had been made from what is believed to be an amount in excess of RM1 billion.

tajudin ramli Tajudin (left) , in his affidavit in support of the notice of motion, states that the Malaysian government is one of the main parties in the suit.

“Based on the latest information available to me I verily believe that the government through the Finance Ministry and other government bodies own 100 per cent of Danaharta, over 70 percent of MAS and 56 percent of Celcom/Axiata and a controlling stake in Telekom. The government also has a golden share in each of the GLCs.

“It is now a fact that I have reached a settlement with the government. This is clearly stated in letters dated Aug 8, 2011, which were sent by Nazri to Danaharta and some GLCs.

"I was informed by the government and finance ministry (MoF), would contact the GLCs to brief them on the terms of settlement and obtain their necessary approvals," read the affidavit.

However, sources who are familiar to the case said Lim had made an application to adjourn the appeal scheduled next week, two days ago but this was turned down.

Other sources denied there was any settlement before them to settle the long-standing dispute and indicated he case will go on as scheduled on Monday.

“There are no signs of the much touted settlement. We have not even seen a goreng pisang (fried fritters) in him paying anything despite the court ordering him to do so,” said the source familiar to the cases, on condition of anonymity.

Cannot divulge details

Tajudin, however, claims in his affidavit, which Malaysiakini has obtained, that he cannot divulge the terms of settlement in public until the government and MoF have briefed and informed the GLCs.

Tajudin claims a plain reading of Nazri's letter, shows the following:

That the government of Malaysia and MoF have agreed to settle all civil cases against me out of court and to withdraw all cases immediately;

  • That YB Nazri has been given a mandate by the government in this matter;
  • That all files should be transferred to another legal firm to enable settlement to be effected immediately and properly; and,
  • That immediate action is required.

Following this,Tajudin claimed that he is raising the preliminary issue in the appeal that the claims by Danaharta against him had been settled and should therefore be withdrawn by the court, said the former MAS chairperson in his supporting affidavit.

Nazri, in responding to the Aug 8 letter, told Malaysiakini that the letter to the GLCs was merely  advice , but now that Tajudin has cited the letter in his affidavit it seems more of a directive for a settlement.

GLCs lawyers ordered to be removed

Tajudin in his preliminary objection which will be heard on Monday claims that following Nazri's letter, the current lawyers representing the GLCs, which among others include Danaharta, Telekom and MAS, have no l ocus standi (legal standing) as they have been instructed by the government and MoF to transfer their files to another law firm.

“This is so that a settlement can be implemented,” said the former MAS chairperson.

“I believe from this that the current solicitors on record namely Messrs Tommy Thomas and Messrs Lee Hishamuddin Allen & Gedhill no longer have the mandate to act in the present appeals,” he said.

parliament gobind singh ban over nazri mistake 251108 04 Nazri (left) had in his letter wanted the existing lawyers be replaced with Umno lawyer Mohd Hafarizam Harun from the firm Hafarizam Wan Aishah & Mubarak.

The former MAS chairperson claimed that he had been duly informed by his lawyer that there was a collective decision to ignore the letter and do not intend to reply to the minister (Nazri).

“I verily believe these counsel informed the court that they did not recognise Nazri as having authority to give them instructions even though he (Nazri) wrote that he had a mandate from the government,” said Tajudin.

“The solicitors made it clear beyond doubt in the most expressed language that their clients (including the directors of the GLCs) would not even reply to the letter from Nazri and would even refuse to meet him to discuss it.

"The GLCs and their directors were acting together with a common purpose to defy the government and insist on proceeding with the suits, contrary to what has been directed.”

Collective decision to pursue suits

He said the only reasonable explanation for such behaviour is that the GLCs and their directors are so intent on pursuing their conspiracy against him.

“They have made a collective decision in furtherance of such conspiracy to pursue civil suits in defiance of clear instructions from the government and MoF that all matters have been settled and are to be withdrawn immediately,” he said.

Referring to Nazri's letter, Tajudin claims he can provide “conclusive proof” that the GLCs and their directors are acting with a common purpose and are still intent on pursuing their conspiracy to destroy him.

Following Nazri's letter, several GLCs had weeks later claimed that there was nothing before them t o consider as settlement.

In the High Court decision, recently promoted Court of Appeal judge, Anantham Kasinater found that Tajudin originally owed Danaharta a total of RM1.4 billion, and that the former Celcom and Technology Research Industries Bhd chairperson failed to settle the reduced debt in four installments spread over three years.

Danaharta had pursued the case but Tajudin had failed to settle his dues. The two parties subsequently reached a settlement on Oct 8, 2001 that included a RM468.18 million "hair cut".

Bar Council president Lim Chee Wee had warned when Nazri's letter surfaced that the GLCs can be subject to a negligence suit if they had failed in their duties to work out an out of court settlement.