Johari can get 1MDB 'full picture' directly from MO1
YOURSAY | 'You mean the S’pore court charged the alleged 1MDB-linked culprits without the full picture?'
Kawak: Finance Minister II Johari Abdul Ghani's statement is a joke. How are we to get the full story on 1MDB when the money trail across international borders were never tracked and allowed to be tracked?
In fact, didn't the attorney-general (AG) rule it was not necessary for the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to track the money trail?
Anonymous #03815719: So Johari, given that you have only half the picture, what actions are you taking to find the other half? Do you have any time frame? Has the money from 1MDB been stolen or not?
AP: People are being convicted in courts overseas and banks have been closed due to the 1MDB scandal, and here the minister is saying only half the story has been heard.
How much more can one be blind?
Watan: If there is no effort to find out more, there will be no complete information. Look at our neighbours, it seems over there they have the whole picture. If you are not capable, just ask for help.
Kneazle: Or do you mean the Singapore court charged the alleged 1MDB-linked culprits without getting the full picture?
681 Porky Pies: Johari, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) has 30 percent of the "story" and Singapore has 20 percent, so add that to the half you mentioned, and we have 100 percent, that is, the full story.
Anonymous 2436471476414726: Poor Johari having to defend the indefensible. The evidence is all there.
The Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (Finma) wanted to assist, but our AG declined their offer. Why, he even refused to cooperate with them. International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) have already taken action against their top executives.
Have we approach them for the required facts? The DOJ and Singapore' s Monetary Authority (MAS) have tonnes of evidence, why don't we seek their assistance?
Therefore the assertion that we cannot charge anyone because we have only half of the story is all bulls***t and you know it.
The only reason why no one has been charged is because those in position dare not do so out of fear of MO1 (Malaysian Official 1). Period.
Fairman: The former AG Abdul Gani Patail was removed and the 1MDB task force was disbanded.
The new AG declared there was no case against PM Najib Razak on the RM2.6 billion in his private accounts as well as the RM42 million from SRC International.
The PM refused to come to Parliament to answer questions, the auditor-general's report was classified under the Official Secrets Act (OSA).
Worse, Najib threatens to sue people for defamation on the 1MDB/RM2.6 billion issue but is still finding excuses not to take his case to court. And he is always trying to strike out opponents' suits or their defence to get a judgment.
Anonymous #40538199: Unless and until the Auditor-General's Report on 1MDB is declassified, the rakyat may believe that they are only getting half of the picture.
Drngsc: Hello, you cannot get the whole picture if documents and audit reports are classified under OSA, investigating heads are removed, and the public accounts committee (PAC) reports are altered.
Meanwhile, the people have been robbed of billions of ringgit. So Johari, where is justice? You could at the very least use your powers to open fresh investigations into 1MDB. Ask the MACC and the police to re-open investigations into 1MDB. Let us begin there.
NNFC: Get a fully independent forensic audit, and I guarantee you there will be charges which can be used in court.
Hopeful But Prepared: Well, technically Johari is right. 1MDB's debts are not the debts of the parent, but they are the debts of the group. Why the distinction?
The same reason why when signing off on accounts with a going concern issue, the auditors are required to obtain a letter of parental support from the parent company (among other things, but this is an important process).
What this implies is that the parent can choose not to bear the debts owed by their subsidiary. Let us be frank, who will be surprised if this is the case? On the other hand, I've never heard of a group that did not honour its debts, even if it is a loss-making subsidiary which had incurred them.
But with the current government, and Johari's statement, well...
Wira: Maybe in Malaysia, after my company owes banks and creditors millions, I can just form another RM2 company and buy over that debt ridden one after unilaterally revaluing its assets to show that my debts/liabilities and assets are in perfect balance.
Can I technically say that RM2 company is debt-free? Johari seems to suggest it is, as long as I can fool everyone through revaluation to inflate my assets.
No-Brainer: This finance minister II is not fit to be a finance minister. He was saying that the parent company is not wholly responsible for its subsidiaries. If this is the case, then the Finance Ministry should have not taken over or acquired wholesale ownership of 1MDB.
They should have disowned it in the first instance. The Finance Ministry must fully bear 1MDB's debts and its liabilities. This means this is going to be the rakyat's burden, which had been created by MO1.
Clever Voter: Ignore the apologists and sympathisers. Johari is a qualified chartered accountant. I am 100 percent sure he knows the truth, but he has to toe the line.
Why bother? It's simply a case of public officers not serving their duty of upholding the simple principle of integrity and public interest.
We are talking about billions of ringgit. A majority of decent and sensible public servants wouldn't do that.
FellowMalaysian: If Johari has the ability to think logically, it is highly unlikely that he would have taken up the post of finance minister II.
Replacing him with a recording machine is more worthwhile.
The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.
These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.