UMNO President Zahid hit with 45 charges of CBT, money laundering and graft

https://youtu.be/C7HK0qSOmdg


KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi has claimed trial to 45 charges of money-laundering involving RM72mil and criminal breach of trust and accepting bribes involving RM42mil.

This is the first time a serving Umno president has been hauled to court to face criminal charges.

For charges one to 10, Dr Ahmad Zahid, who was trustee of Yayasan Akalbudi, was accused of committing CBT involving RM20,833,132.99 belonging to the foundation.

The former deputy prime minister and home minister allegedly committed the offences at Affin Bank Bhd at Jalan Bunus here between Jan 13, 2014 and Jan 11, 2016.

The charges under Section 409 of the Penal Code provides for imprisonment between two and 20 years, whipping and fine, upon conviction.

For charges 11 to 18, Dr Ahmad Zahid was accused of receiving RM21,250,000 in gratification in his capacity as home minister.

The bribes were allegedly from Syarikat Mastoro Kenny IT Consul­tant & Services as an inducement for the accused to assist the company obtain MyEG projects which is under the purview of the Home Ministry; Syarikat Data Sonic Group Bhd director Chew Ben Ben, with the company appointed to insert passport chips for five years or 12.5 million chips in Malaysian passports; and from Syarikat Profound Radiance Sdn Bhd director Azlan Shah Jaffril, with the company appointed as service provider of a one-stop visa centre for Pakistan and Nepal.

The offences were allegedly committed at Malayan Banking Bhd in Bangsar between Dec 7, 2016 and March 15 this year.

The charges under Section 16(a)(B) of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009 carry a jail term of up to 20 years and fine of not less than five times the sum of gratification or RM10,000, whichever is higher, upon conviction.

For the remaining 27 charges, Dr Ahmad Zahid was accused of money laundering involving RM72mil, said to be proceeds from unlawful activities by way of:

> Giving directions to deposit between RM600,000 and RM9.35mil into two bank accounts;

> Giving instructions to purchase two bungalow lots worth RM5.9mil in Kajang; and

> Instructing one Omar Ali Abdullah to convert RM6.8mil into 30 pieces of cheques for the purpose of purchasing fixed deposits in Maybank.

The offences were allegedly committed at Maybank in Bangsar and Marhaba Enterprise Sdn Bhd in Jalan Bukit Bintang between March 29, 2016 and April 11, 2018.

The charges under Section 4(1)(a) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 carry a jail term of up to 15 years and fine of not less than five times the sum involved or RM5mil, whichever is higher, upon conviction.

Dr Ahmad Zahid, 65, who wore an orange batik shirt, appeared calm as the charges were being read out for about an hour.

At one point, he even turned around and smiled at the public gallery.

Counsel Hisyam Teh Poh Teik stood by him outside the dock as the court interpreter read the charges.

Datuk Seri Gopal Sri Ram, who was appointed to lead the prosecution by the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), suggested that bail be set at RM2mil.

Hisyam asked that bail be paid in two instalments, to which Sri Ram argued: “The rule is that the accused must post bail on the same day, otherwise he may have been kept in custody. There must be no exception.”

Hisyam said there were judicial precedence in the cases involving Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor where the same court allowed bail to be posted in instalments, and added that there was no risk of his client escaping.

Sessions Court judge Azura Alwi allowed bail at RM2mil in one surety, to be paid in two instalments.

“There is no question of this court according special treatment to anyone,” she remarked, ordering RM1mil to be posted yesterday and the balance to be settled by or on Oct 26.

A family friend of the accused posted the first bail instalment. Mention was fixed for Dec 14
 - The Star by Nurbaiti Hamdan

Related stories:

Many line road leading to court complex

Names of several companies pop up in charge sheet

Detailed: Zahid Hamidi’s CBT and corruption charges 

Zahid Slapped With 45 Charges, May Face 405 Years in Jail for Just ...

Related post:

Najib & his strong wife Rosmah with 17 charges in Court over money laundering

Golden opportunity for DAP leaders to practise what they preached

In May this year, we voted for a change of government at both state and federal levels after 61 years of suffering under the yoke of Umno and its partners. We voted for hope and change.

The Pakatan Harapan (PH) parties went from being in the opposition to becoming the government of the day. When they were opposition politicians they could only voice their objections and concerns. But today they are in power to carry out what they hoped and fought for. Are they carrying out the trust that we placed in them?

Let us examine this in relation to the biggest project confronting the people of Penang (also one of the largest mega projects in Malaysia): the RM46 billion Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP), and more immediately, phase 1 of this plan – the proposed Penang Island Link 1 (PIL 1) and the LRT project. The PIL 1 is an extension of the aborted Penang Outer Ring Road (PORR).

What did our present Chief Minister Chow Kon Yeow say when he was the opposition MP in 2002? “If the findings of the Halcrow Report are true, Dr Koh would be irresponsible in pushing the PORR through as this will not be a long-term solution to the traffic congestion on the island…”

There were two other minor reasons why Chow opposed the PORR: because it was a tolled road and no open tender was used to award the project. But these cannot be the main reasons for opposing it.

And what did Lim Kit Siang say on May 28, 2002?

“The nightmare of the Penang traffic congestion is likely to be back to square one, not in eight years but probably less than five years, after the completion of PORR.

“What Penang needs is an efficient public transport system based on sustainable transport policy, as PORR is not a medium-term let alone long-term solution to the traffic congestion nightmare on the island.”

Since these two DAP leaders could not be clearer on why they opposed construction of the PORR as it would not solve traffic problems, how does Chow now justify the PIL 1?

According to the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the PIL 1, the consultants reported that by 2030 (between five and seven years after completion of PIL 1), traffic volume will reach up to 8,000 pcu/hour (passenger car unit) during evening peak hours.

Translated into layman’s terms, we would be back to square one in terms of traffic congestion. This was exactly what the transport report of 1998 by international consultant Halcrow said of PORR. Back then, Chow asked Koh Tsu Koon (then Penang’s chief minister) to disprove Halcrow’s findings. Today we ask Chow the same question.

Public policy must be based on scientific study, analysis and evidence, not on whims and fancies. (That is why the Penang state government funds the Penang Institute to provide sound policy analysis and advice.) If the EIA’s conclusion is that the PIL 1 will not solve traffic congestion in the medium and long term, then the chief minister must justify to the people of Penang on what other grounds he based his decision to spend RM8 billion on one highway that will not solve Penang’s traffic congestion and is fraught with safety risks, on top of financial, environmental, social and health costs. How should he explain his volte-face?

Lim Kit Siang made it clear that the only alternative is to have an efficient public transport system. This is a golden opportunity for these leaders to implement what they preached. The chief minister said at a town hall meeting on Sept 20 that the state is proposing a balanced approach to solving the transport problem: building roads and public transport.

Let us examine the actual facts.

1. Penang island presently has 2.8 times more highways on a per capita basis than Singapore (84m per 1,000 persons in Penang versus 30m per 1,000 persons in Singapore).

2. The state government under the PTMP is planning to build another 70km of highways, many of them elevated, marring the city landscape and thereby doubling our highway per capita to 4.5 times that of Singapore.

3. Presently Penang’s public modal share of transport is dismal at 5%, i.e., only 5% of people who travel use public transport, compared to 67% in Singapore.

From the above, it is clear that Penang’s transport situation today is totally tilted towards roads and against public transport. Hence a balanced approach must mean prioritising improvement of public transport and not the construction of more highways that encourage more private road use.

The primary objective of the PTMP is to raise public modal transport share to 40% by 2030. But spending RM15 billion on building highways in the first phase of the PTMP (RM8 billion on PIL 1 plus RM6.5 billion on the three paired roads and tunnel under the Zenith package) and RM8 billion on one LRT line is NOT a balanced approach.

In fact, under the Halcrow PTMP, an integrated public transport network consisting of trams, bus rapid transit, commuter rail and a new cross-channel ferry service was estimated to cost RM10 billion. But all these are shelved or relegated to future dates while priority is given to building highways. The chief minister must explain to the people of Penang why such an unbalanced approach is adopted. Is the policy based on scientific evidence or on other types of interests that we are unaware of?

The saying that “justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done” aptly applies in this case. The people of Penang must have clear and credible answers to dispel any possible misgivings.

I respect and have worked with Chow for the last 10 years on the Penang transport issue.

I recall what he told Koh: that if the findings of the EIA report are true then Koh would be irresponsible in pushing the PORR.

Now, in the case of PIL 1, the arguments are even stronger that this will not be a long-term solution to the traffic congestion on the island.

Source: FMT by Lim Mah Hui

Lim Mah Hui is a former professor, international banker and Penang Island city councillor.

The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of FMT.

Related posts:

New mode of public transport, the ART (Autonomous Rail-Rapid Transit) for Penang, wait no more !

 

Penang Forum calls to review Penang mega projects

 

Penang new Chief Minister taking Penang to the next level

 

 Go-ahead likely for Penang LRT

 

Penang Island City Council, MBPP councilor Dr Lim fed up change not happening in Penang

 

 Penang Transport Master Plan (PTMP) - Tunnel project rocked, Directors arrested in graft probe

 

Penang's eight transport plans unfulfilled, Not even one commenced work, says Teng

Rage against hill road plan: We don't want that road, says Penang residents 

 

Penang undersea tunnel developer CZC 'duped into paying RM22mil' at gun point?

 

Penang undersea tunnel project scrutinized by the Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission (MACC) 

 

PTMP: Losses making fashion company in Penang Undersea Tunnel Project

 

Tough questions on Penang turnel project; Engineering Consultant arrested in probe

Malaysia’s widening income gap between rich and the poor has only RM76 a month after expenses

The State of Households - Khazanah Research Institute  

Launch of State of Households 2018: Different Realities. From left to right: Datuk Hisham Hamdan, Dr Nungsari Ahmad Radhi, Allen Ng, Dr Suraya Ismail, Junaidi Mansor.

 Malaysia's widening income gap

KUALA LUMPUR: The gap in income between the rich, middle class and poor in Malaysia has widened since 2008, according to a study by Khazanah Research Institute (KRI).

In its “The State of Households 2018” report, the research outfit of sovereign wealth fund Khazanah Nasional Bhd noted that the gap in the real average income between the top-20% households (T20) and the middle-40% (M40) and bottom-40% (B40) households in Malaysia has almost doubled compared to two decades ago.

The report, entitled “Different Realities”, pointed out that while previous economic crises in 1987 and the 1997/98 Asian Financial Crisis saw a reduction in the income gap between the T20 and B40/M40, post 2008/09 Global Financial Crisis (GFC), those disparities were not reduced.

But the Gini coefficient, which measures income inequality in the country, had declined from 0.513 in 1970 to 0.399 in 2016, denoting improvement in income inequality in Malaysia over the past 46 years.

Explaining the phenomenon, Allen Ng, who is the lead author of the KRI report, said income of the T20 households had continued to grow, albeit at a slower pace than that of the M40 and B40 since 2010.

“However, because they (the T20) started at a higher base, the income gap between the T20 and M40/B40 had continued to grow despite the fact that the relative (income growth) is actually narrowing post-GFC,” Ng explained at a press conference after the launch of the report here yesterday.

On that note, Ng calls for greater emphasis and investment in human capital to address the income disparities in the country.

“Human capital is the lynchpin that will help us in the next mile of development,” Ng said.

“Based on the work that we have done, and the way we read the issue, the most important equaliser in terms of income inequality is actually human capital. If we don’t address the quality of our education system, we will not be able to solve the problem of income inequality,” he added.

Among the many key issues highlighted in the report, the state of human capital development in Malaysia was noted as a crucial element to complement the country’s transition towards a knowledge-based economy.

“To complement the knowledge-based economy, the state of human capital development in this country – of which 20% of government expenditure goes to education – has plenty of room for improvement,” the report stated.

Worryingly, the report noted that despite Malaysians receiving 12 years of schooling, they receive only nine years’ worth of schooling after adjusting for education quality.

“The central issue of generating high-quality human capital in this country is an important one as the transition to a high-income nation requires human capital levels that continuously improve productivity, sustain growth and are able to create or utilise technological advancements rather than being substituted by it,” the report said.

Meanwhile, KRI also noted that despite the improvement in income inequality and declining poverty rates in Malaysia, poverty in the country remained rampant.

“While the absolute poverty rate has been steadily declining, it is estimated that an additional one million households lived in ‘relative poverty’ in 2016 compared to two decades ago,” it said in its report.-  The Star

Malaysia's Lower Income Group Only Has RM76 To Spend A Month After Expenses

Shocking.

Some numbers for your soul.- PIC: Department of Statistics Malaysia

According to The Star Online, these households -- categorised under the bottom 40% (B40) income group in the country because they are earning less than RM2,000 a month -- only have RM76 to spare, after deductions, in 2016.

As comparison, these households have a residual income of RM124 in 2014.

The reason for the sharp decline? They were forced to spend more of their income on household items.

The study revealed that these households are spending 95 per cent of their total income on consumption items in 2016 compared to 2014, when the same households spend 'only' 92 per cent of their income on daily items.


So, what's the cause behind this worrying trend?

The report indicated that the rising cost of living is mainly to be blamed for the increase in household expenditure, so #ThanksNajib.

In fact, the report revealed that the high cost of living has affected not only the B40, but all income groups as well.

The real residual household income has, according to the report, reduced for all income classes. For example, households earning above RM15,000 has a real resi­dual income of RM13,100 in 2016, down from RM14,458 in 2014.

Sigh, we guess we just have to spend our money wisely from now on. No more RM16 Caramel Frappuccino® from Starbucks from now on.

Money, where did you go?

We know we keep saying that we're broke, but after reading this report, we found out that there are a lot of people out there who are having it worse than us.

A recent Khazanah Research Insti­tute (KRI) study revealed that every month, the average lower-income household in Malaysia has barely enough to survive after household expenses are deducted.

It's, like, really, really bad!



Related:

We need a complete overhaul of our education system, says NUTP - Nation

Malaysia's widening income gap between rich and poor - Business ...

RM76 a month after expenses

More women at work narrows gender gap

 

Woman loses RM1.2mil to scammers 'investigating' her for money laundering

Related posts:

Malaysia's RM1.09 trillion debt, 80.3% of GDP demystified

 

Malaysia must retool education, skills to adapt to knowledge economy

https://youtu.be/-5kgs6ecbHE

Govt Linked Companies (GLCs) - Monsters in the house?

 

Bloated civil sevice in Malaysia must cut down the size and salaries

 

Housing affordability is an income issue, what's with the fuss?