As an ordinary member of the public, I find Umno supreme council member Mohd Puad Zakarshi’s statement as most illogical.

According to the director-general of the Information Ministry’s Special Affairs Division (Jasa), the settlement between Abu Dhabi’s International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC) and 1MDB will put the US Department of Justice (DOJ) case against 1MDB on the back burner.

I quote from Puad’s statement: “This arbitration settlement has weakened the US DOJ civil suit and claims that 1MDB’s funds were stolen.” Puad claimed that this latest development has also “derailed the DOJ civil suit to seize more than US$1 billion in assets allegedly purchased using funds siphoned from 1MDB.”

Jho Low may be charged in the US

All this simply does not make sense at all. As far as we know, the DOJ’s case is still ongoing. In fact, young flamboyant Low Taek Jho may face charges in the US. This is one reason why his family went to the US to contest for the properties seized by the DOJ instead of the infamous Jho Low himself.

Low is also a person of interest in the ongoing investigation in Singapore. Low has never dared to face the investigators in both the US and Singapore. Like Zakir Naik, a fugitive currently allegedly evading the Indian authorities, Low’s whereabouts is largely unknown.

If the US is going after Low, how could the case be weakened? I would say that the DOJ civil suit is getting to the root of the scandal. At this juncture, the DOJ has only labelled one of the players as Malaysian Official 1 (MO1).

They have not named Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak; however, it was Minister in the Prime Minister’s department Abdul Rahman Dahlan who openly told the whole world that MO1 was none other than Najib himself.

The full story of the money trail is outlined in the civil suit, which led to the DOJ calling us a nation of kleptocrats. Perhaps, Puad should go back to the original DOJ documents to understand what DAP lawmaker Tony Pua is hinting at.

From the DOJ’s investigations, we learnt that a total of US$3.5 billion was supposed to be paid to IPIC, instead it went into a British Virgin Island-registered entity,Aabar BVI.

Pua’s allegations

So what exactly is Puad trying to tell us, he himself appears to be unclear of. Instead of confusing us, Puad should state why he disagreed with Tony Pua that by settling the amount of US$3.5 billion, 1MDB would have paid out twice of the same amount.

The money trail detected by the DOJ shows to us that the money paid to Aabar BVI did not reach IPIC. In fact, although they shared almost identical names, IPIC had denied that Aabar BVI was its subsidiary.

Where is the money paid to Aabar BVI? Why did Puad avoid explaining where the money went and who were behind Aabar BVI? If the money had been paid to the real Aabar, why does IPIC still demand the money from 1MDB?

Which company or business is so stupid as to make payment twice, especially if there is such a huge amount of money involved? Moreover, where is 1MDB’s money coming from since it has not been profitable at all?

If 1MDB had been transparent in its governance, why does the auditor-general’s report on the ailing investment arm be still considered under Official Secrets Act (OSA)?

In the first place, an audit report is to make transparent the integrity in the financial accounts of a company. Why is our government keeping it from full disclosure?

Puad should be more up-front in stating whether the money used to pay IPIC in a settlement is from the taxpayers’ coffers. If 1MDB really had the money to pay, why did it not pay the debts? Why did IPIC have to file the complaint with the London Court of Arbitration?

STEPHEN NG is an ordinary citizen with an avid interest in following political developments in the country since 2008.