Home Tags Posts tagged with "Tony Pua"

Tony Pua

KUALA LUMPUR – Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has sued Petaling Jaya Utara member of parliament Tony Pua Kiam Wee for slander in regard to Pua’s live video statement about the tabling of the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 Bill (RUU355).

The Prime Minister filed the lawsuit in his personal capacity through Messrs Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak, today.

In his statement of claim, Najib said Pua made a statement at the Parliament Building lobby on April 6, which was recorded and uploaded by the defendant and/or his agents in his official Facebook, ‘Tony Pua’.

The plaintiff claimed the two minutes and 21 seconds video clip titled, “BN Govt abandons all Bills to give precedence to PAS RUU355 Private Member’s Bill”, could be widely and freely accessed through internet.

Najib alleged that the defendant’s statement had specifically referred to him and could be taken to mean that he had abused his power by giving an order through the Cabinet to the Dewan Rakyat Speaker to allow the motion by the Marang member of parliament on the Private Member’s Bill and to set aside other Bills.

He alleged that the statement could also be taken to mean that he had ignored the doctrine of separation of powers between the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary, had conspired with PAS to split Malay votes among the opposition parties, and a leader who practised dirty politics to hang on to power.

Najib said the statement had seriously defamed and caused him to be brought into public scandal, odium and contempt before friends, associates and the general public in the country and internationally.

He said the defendant without any feeling of remorse or regret continued to slander him with same old issues for which he had filed a defamation suit to the High Court here on May 3, 2015.

Najib who is also Barisan Nasional chairman said the defendant’s action to slander him with the same old issued clearly showed malicious intent. The defendant’s disparaging words, he further alleged, had caused serious damage and strained the relationship between him and people and the international community.

He is suing Pua under Section 5 of the Defamation Act 1957.

On April 11, the plaintiff sent a notice to the defendant demanding of the latter to stop slandering him and to issue an apology in writing within seven days from the date. However, the defendant failed to respond to the letter of demand.

Najib is seeking among others, general and exemplary damages, costs and interest and other relief deemed fit by the court from the date of judgement.

He is seeking an injunction to restrain the defendant or his agents in whatever manner from further defaming him.

He is also seeking an order to compel Pua to issue a written apology which must be published in at least two major newspapers and in the form and wordings chosen by him (plaintiff).

Najib is further seeking an order to compel Pua to remove the video clip from his Facebook immediately, .

Meanwhile, the High Court today granted the plaintiff’s ex parte application for an injunction to prevent the defendant from publishing the same or similar words as contained in the latter’s statement.

Najib’s lawyer Datuk Mohd Hafarizam Harun told reporters that justice Abu Bakar Jais who presided over the application at 4.45pm today also set May 5 for inter partes hearing of the injunction.

Counsel said Najib made the ex parte application based on personal concern of the extent of damage that Pua’s slanderous statement could do with regard to his position as Prime Minister, Finance Minister as well as leader of a political party. – BERNAMA

KUALA LUMPUR – The defamation suit filed by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak against Petaling Jaya Utara MP, Tony Pua Kiam Wee over the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) issue will be heard in court from Sept 18 to 20.

Judicial Commissioner Datuk Roslan Abu Bakar set the dates in chambers, with lawyer Nor Hazira Abu Haiyan, representing Najib, and Pua’s lawyer Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi also present.

Met by reporters, Alliff Benjamin said the court also set April 3 to hear Pua’s application to strike out Najib’s suit.

Najib, in his personal capacity, had filed the defamation suit on March 5 last year, naming Pua, 43, as the first defendant and Mediarakyat.net portal owner, Chan Chee Kong, 52, as the second defendant, over the 1MDB issue.

Najib, as the plaintiff in his statement of claims, stated that on Nov 13, 2014, Pua, as the main speaker at a DAP fund-raising dinner, had made libellous remarks on 1MDB.

Najib said a recording of the speech was uploaded by Chan himself and/or his agents on the Mediarakyat YouTube and Mediarakyat website under what he claimed was a libellous heading.

He said the recorded speech contained words that referred to and related to him and defamed him and the individual known as the ‘prime minister’, and must have referred specifically to him (Najib).

Najib said the publication of the defamatory words had damaged his reputation as the recording of the speech could be assessed widely and easily throughout the world via the Internet, blogs, forums and websites without any restriction and could be reshared.


KUALA LUMPUR – The following is a statement by Communications and Multimedia Minister Datuk Seri Dr Salleh Said Keruak posted in his blog today:

“Today Lim Kit Siang asked me to take tuition from Tony Pua to improve my knowledge on financial matters, “as a little knowledge is dangerous”, Kit Siang had said.

“I take it Kit Siang has himself been tutored by Tony, whom he seems to regard as a financial guru. What Kit Siang listed down in his blog were merely the operational issues involved in doing business. Companies raise funds from various sources to buy assets and do business. That is quite normal unless the company starts business with a huge paid up capital. And in 1MDB’s case the startup capital was only RM1 million.

“The issue here is did 1MDB physically lose RM42 billion like what has been alleged? Tun Dr Mahathir said RM42 billion has ‘lesap’ or disappeared into thin air. This would mean 1MDB has nothing to show for it. That is not true because 1MDB has RM51 billion worth of assets to show for it plus ongoing development for the next couple of decades.

“So I do not need tutoring from Tony, like Kit Siang does, to understand something so fundamental. And I did not attend the Save Malaysia Roundtable because the event was not about saving Malaysia but had other ulterior motives and hidden agendas.

“On the BMF and Bank Negara Forex issues, which Kit Siang mentioned, those are real and physical losses with no benefit to the country. On the other hand, 1MDB is a going concern. Maybe Kit Siang should change tutors if Tony did not explain this to him.” – BERNAMA

KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak has succeeded in his bid to remove two paragraphs and exhibits relating to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) from Tony Pua’s affidavit on grounds that the Petaling Jaya Utara MP relied on hearsay evidence.

High Court Judicial Commissioner Roslan Abu Bakar on Thursday held that Pua failed to state his sources of information and grounds of his belief when the MP included those content in his affidavit.

“It is hearsay and inadmissible,” JC Roslan said.

He said Pua had failed to adhere to the requirements of the Rules of Court 2012 over the matter and ordered the paragraphs and exhibits removed from the affidavit.

Pua’s lead counsel Gobind Singh Deo said he would study the judgment to consider whether to appeal over this.

Najib had failed to strike out certain parts from a news portal owner Chan Chee Kong’s statement of defence relating to 1MDB over his defamation suit.

JC Roslan held that Chan had followed the requirements of the Rules of Court 2012 in the statement of defence for fair comment.

In his civil suit, Najib said that Pua, 42, had delivered a speech at a DAP fund-raising dinner on Nov 3, 2014, relating to 1MDB, which slandered him.

Najib, 61, sued both defendants in his personal capacity.

PETALING JAYA: 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) president and group executive director Arul Kanda Kandasamy has accepted Tony Pua’s challenge to a debate following the conclusion of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) investigation into the government investment arm.

In a statement on Friday, Arul Kanda questioned the Petaling Jaya Utara MP’s remarks calling him a liar and asking him to resign from 1MDB just hours before issuing the debate challenge on Thursday.

“It is clear that YB Tony is confused and contradicts himself. He does not know if he loves me or hates me.

“He says I should resign, then says I need to stay on and debate with him,” he said.

Arul Kanda also said that he hopes Pua, who is a member of the PAC, had consulted the Parliament Speaker before issuing the challenge.

“To avoid being embarrassed a second time, I hope YB Tony has first checked with the Speaker of Parliament before issuing this debate challenge,” he said.

Arul Kanda said that despite questioning him for two full days at the PAC hearing, Pua still wanted “to spend quality time” with him.

“Far be it from me, to deny YB Tony this pleasure.

“I hereby accept the debate challenge. Bring it on!” he said.

On April 7, the 106-page PAC report on 1MDB was tabled in the Dewan Rakyat.

This is the second time Pua has challenged Arul Kanda to a live debate over 1MDB.

Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia had said that to safeguard Parliament’s integrity, Pua should first resign from the PAC if he wanted to debate with Arul Kanda.

1MDB refers to a statement issued by YB Tony Pua today. True to form, he has made a number of sensationalist and wrong remarks, despite being fully aware of the facts. His remarks are also wholly unnecessary, given the ongoing investigation by PDRM.

However, 1MDB wishes to clarify a number of matters raised by YB Tony’s remarks, as follows:

1. 1MDB has shared all documents in its possession, and those it could obtain, with the National Audit Department (NAD). Where relevant, substantial reasons were given for each omission.

2. It is these very same documents shared by 1MDB with the NAD which show the ownership of, payments to, and underlying legal documents relating to Aabar Investments PJS Limited (“Aabar BVI”). Hence there are no “lies” or suppression of information, as wrongly claimed by YB Tony.

3. The relevant payments were made between 2012 – 2014. There are clear references to these payments in the publicly available 31.03.2013 and 31.03.2014 1MDB audited financial statements. Furthermore, there has been significant public commentary by the media and others, on these payments, for at least the past three years, including from YB Tony himself.

4. For an as yet to be determined reason, IPIC and Aabar are only now seeking to deny ownership of Aabar BVI or receipt of the payments. This will no doubt be the subject matter of further enquiry and discussion. 1MDB is exploring all its options in this regard.

It is therefore wrong and unprofessional of YB Tony to personalise this issue by linking it to Mr. Arul Kanda. It is clear that each of these transfers happened before Mr. Arul Kanda assumed his role at 1MDB, therefore he can only rely on what the company records show, in formulating his answers.

In fact, notwithstanding the challenges and constant carping from YB Tony, Mr Arul Kanda has delivered major asset sales and repaid all short term debt/bank debt, with 1MDB now having RM2.3 billion cash in the bank. The company has also recently repaid the RM950 million standby credit facility from the Government of Malaysia. Even YB Tony has no choice but to admit this success, against all odds.

1MDB is confident of its legal position in relation to the US$3.5 billion cash deposits paid to Aabar BVI. In this regard, the company will pursue all available avenues open to it. In addition, 1MDB commits to fully cooperate with PDRM with its investigations, following the PAC recommendation. The company has always maintained and continues to maintain that if any wrongdoing is found, then action must be taken, according to the law.

PETALING JAYA: 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) called Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua a “one trick pony” after his comments that 1MDB failed to clarify the nature and ownership of Aabar Investment PJS Limited (BVI).

1MDB said in a statement on Monday that a US$1.4 (RM5.4)bil payment to Aabar was described in “clear and transparent terms” in its financial statements in 2013 and 2014.

It said for all major payments made by the company, 1MDB has provided detailed explanations along with supporting documentary evidence to the Auditor General’s Department.

It added that it thoroughly explained all its major transactions at the recent Public Accounts Committee (PAC) proceedings.

“Sadly though, true to form, YB Tony Pua is a one trick pony, who can only recycle old and stale allegations,” 1MDB said.

1MDB added Pua, who is a PAC member, not only has the requisite information but had the opportunity to ask for more information during the proceedings.

“YB Tony Pua, therefore, clearly has selective amnesia at best, or at worst, is once again up to his old tricks, to recycle allegations, ask questions to which he already knows the answers to and seek to confuse and mislead the public,” 1MDB said.

Pua had said that if 1MDB fails to provide clarity on the nature and ownership of Aabar (BVI) with the necessary and appropriate documents, any denials it made about the company not being an “intermediary” would have zero credibility.

This was in response to a 1MDB statement denying any involvement in providing funds for the Hollywood hit ‘The Wolf of Wall Street.’

KUALA LUMPUR – Inspector-General of Police (IGP), Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar wants the Police Cyber Investigation Response Centre (PCIRC) to investigate Selangor DAP chairman Tony Pua over his posting on his Twitter account yesterday, on the court’s decision on teenager Aminulrasyid Amzah’s case.

Khalid said the Petaling Jaya Utara member of Parliament had deliberately twisted facts to create public confusion.

[email protected] This tweet has deliberately twisted facts aimed at confusing the people. Call this person and investigate,” he said in his latest posting on Twitter.

Pua had on his Twitter account, written, “This thug said 14-year-old Aminulrasyid was shot by police because there were dangerous weapons in his car”, linking it to a news article titled, “IGP refuses to apologise to Aminulrasyid’s family”.

Last Thursday, the family of Aminulrasyid, who died in the police shooting six years ago, received damages amounting to RM414,800 after the High Court allowed their claim for damages against the police and government.

In their suit, Aminulrasyid’s mother, Norsiah Mohammad, 67, and his eldest sister, Nor Azura, 46, as the plaintiffs, named Corporal Jenain Subi, the Shah Alam district police chief, Tan Sri Khalid as the former Selangor police chief, IGP and the Malaysian government as the defendants. – BERNAMA

KUALA LUMPUR – The High Court here has set April 13 for hearing of Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak’s application to expunge certain paragraphs in Tony Pua Kiam Wee’s supporting affidavit.

The case pertained to the prime minister’s defamation suit against the Petaling Jaya Utara member of parliament over the latter’s remarks about 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).

Judicial commissioner Datuk Roslan A. Bakar fixed the date in chambers today, with Najib being represented by his lawyer Choo Shi Jin and Pua, by counsel Alliff Benjamin Suhaimi.

Mediarakyat.net portal owner Chan Chee Kong who is the second defendant in the case, was represented by Shahid Adli Kamarudin.

Alliff told reporters when met that the court would also hear Pua’s application to strike out Najib’s lawsuit against him, on the same day.

He said the court had also fixed April 22 for hearing of another application by Najib to expunge certain paragraphs in Chan’s defence statement.

The prime minister filed the suit against Pua, 43, and Chan, 52, in his personal capacity on March 5 last year.

In his statement of claim, he alleged that Pua as the main speaker at a DAP fund raising dinner on Nov 14, 2014, had made disparaging remarks about 1MDB.

He alleged that Pua’s speech, under a libellous heading, was uploaded by Chan or his agent on YouTube Mediarakyat and the Mediarakyat website.

Najib alleged that disparaging remarks in the speech contained references alluding to him as the prime minister.

The remarks, Najib alleged, had portrayed him as having robbed the people’s money with regard to 1MDB’s business undertakings and a person who was not trustworthy or qualified to hold the position.

Najib also alleged that publication of the libellous article which could be accessed and shared freely worldwide through the internet, blogs, forums and websites had damaged his reputation. – BERNAMA

PETALING JAYA: Tony Pua has revealed 10 questions he plans to ask Arul Kanda Kandasamy during his highly-anticipated debate with the 1MDB chief.

“While we wait for the much anticipated face-off, I would like to offer Arul Kanda the heads up, so that he can prepare the necessary answers whether during replies or debate speech,” the DAP national publicity secretary posted on his blog.

This, he said, would preclude any reasons for Arul Kanda not to answer as he would have ample time to prepare the necessary documents and replies.

Pua said that all 10 of the questions were financial in nature and that “none of the questions are political”.

“No confidential Public Accounts Committee information has been utilised to raise the above questions. All information are derived from publicly available sources.

“Hence, this is not a case of scoring political points but one of which is meant to expose the truth since Arul has consistently insisted that 1MDB has ‘nothing to cover up’,” said Pua.

Pua also said that Kulai and Serdang MPs Teo Nie Ching and Dr Ong Kian Ming respectively would be having discussions with the 1MDB team on his behalf to finalise the format and details of the proposed “live discussion, talk show or debate”.

Pua had previously challenged Arul Kanda to join him on a live talk show to dispel any allegations made against 1MDB, which Arul Kanda agreed to on the condition that Pua stepped down from the PAC.

However, during a press conference on Saturday, Arul Kanda announced that he would withdraw the condition and was willing to meet Pua for a live discussion, which is now being arranged.

Here are the questions Pua raised:

1. Why did Bank Negara withdraw its approval for 1MDB to transfer more than US$1.8 billion overseas? Was it because most of the funds were transferred to an account which is unrelated to the 1MDB joint venture project with Petrosaudi International Limited as revealed in the leaked Board meeting minutes which Arul Kanda has acknowledged to be true? How much was transferred to this unrelated account? Did this unrelated account belong to Good Star Limited and who owns or controls Good Star Limited?

2. Is it true that 1MDB had invested the initial US$1 billion cash to acquire 40% of 1MDB-Petrosaudi while Petrosaudi only need to invest its rights to certain oil reserves in the Caspian Sea and in Argentina for its 60% stake? In addition, were the rights to the Caspian Sea oil reserves terminated by Petrosaudi within 2 months after the signing of the joint venture agreement, which meant that Petrosaudi secured their 60% stake without investing anything significant?

3. Is it true that 1MDB had proceeded to sign the joint venture agreement with Petrosaudi in a rush, without securing the necessary Board of Directors approval at that point of time as revealed in the same Board minutes?

4. 1MDB Financial Statements dated 31 March 2013 and 2014 stated that US$1.4 billion was held as a deposit by International Petroleum Investment Corporation (IPIC) as a condition for IPIC to guarantee 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion bond issue. However, the IPIC Financial Statements dated December 2013 and 2014 audited by Ernst & Young did not disclose any such condition for the provision of the guarantee. The balance sheet of IPIC also did not reflect any such refundable deposit received or held. Why hasn’t 1MDB sought IPIC to clarify where the money has gone?

5. Did 1MDB pay US$993 million from the US$1.22 billion it partially redeemed from the Cayman Islands investment fund AND another US$975 million borrowed from Deutsche Bank led consortium to terminate options 1MDB granted to Aabar Investments as part of another condition by IPIC to guarantee 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion bond issue? What exactly is the total sum paid and payable to Aabar or IPIC? Why is it that IPIC disclosed in its December 2014 Financial Statements that 1MDB still owes IPIC a sum of US$481 million for the said termination?
In addition, if the US$993 million from the US$1.22 billion redeemed from Cayman Islands was not paid to Aabar or IPIC, where did the money go?

6. It has been disclosed in 1MDB’s financial statements, parliamentary replies and media releases that 1MDB Global Investment Limited borrowed US$3 billion in March 2013 for the purposes in investing in a 50:50 joint venture with Aabar Investments Limited where the joint venture will invest in the development of Tun Razak Exchange. The question is, how come more than US$1.5 billion of the borrowings have been utilised for purposes other than specified as disclosed in the March 2014 Audited Accounts, particularly since the joint venture has yet to be activated to date?

7. Arul Kanda had earlier informed Malaysians and 1MDB Directors, according to the above leaked minutes, that the balance of the Cayman Islands investment amounting to US$1.108 billion was fully redeemed and was held in cash in BSI Bank Singapore. However, the 1MDB President has since admitted that the redeemed amount was not cash but they were “fund units” worth US$940 million. Why are these “fund units” which were redeemed from the Cayman Island fund still in the form of “fund units” and not in cash or, raw assets like property and shares? If they were in “fund units”, doesn’t it mean that the Caymans fund was never redeemed in the first place?

8. Arul Kanda announced the “debt for asset-swap” deal with IPIC where the latter assumes some RM16 billion of 1MDB’s debts in exchange for 1MDB’s assets. IPIC has already advanced more than US$1 billion in the deal. Where is 1MDB going to produce these RM16 billion worth of assets to transfer to IPIC by 30 June 2016?
The Ministry of Finance (MoF) has also indemnified IPIC in the “debt of asset-swap” arrangement. Does it mean that if 1MDB fails to produce the necessary RM16 billion worth of assets by 30 June 2016, the MoF would have to compensate IPIC accordingly?

9. Arul had declared that the disposal of its subsidiary, Edra Energy will allow it to remove RM16-RM18 billion of 1MDB’s debt. However, the total debts associated to 1MDB’s energy arm amounts to approximately RM36 billion, comprising of US$3.5 billion of bonds, RM5.7 billion of direct loans and more than RM8 billion of inherited loans. Hence reducing up to RM18 billion of debt via the disposal of Edra Energy will still leave 1MDB with more that RM18 billion of outstanding debt associated with its energy acquisitions. Therefore how will the sale of Edra solve 1MDB’s cash flow problem since there’ll be no assets left to pay the balance of the RM18 billion debt?

10. Did the Federal Government issue a “letter of support” in May 2015 to Bank EXIM to borrow US$150 million (RM600 million) where the funds was utilised by 1MDB to pay for its land acquisition from Tadmax Resources Bhd for approximately RM300 million? If so, what was the balance of the proceeds from the borrowing used for?