Langkawi MP chastised for claiming Agong is MO1

Langkawi MP Nawawi Ahmad

PETALING JAYA: Langkawi MP Nawawi Ahmad has received flak for allegedly naming the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as the Malaysian Official One (MO1) mentioned in the US Department of Justice’s (DoJ) report.

Nawawi, in a Facebook comment on Tuesday provided his own method of determining the identity of the person.

“According to the Federal Constitution, the country’s government was formed with three separate and independent entities which are the judiciary headed by the chief justice, the parliamentary body led by the Speaker, and the executive directed by the prime minister.

“Hence, in accordance to the Constitution, the Agong is the MO1.”

FMT’s checks revealed that the last line had been removed from the original Facebook posting, which can still be seen by clicking on the post’s “Edited” button.

It was replaced with: “All three entities are responsible to the Agong. Hence, Najib is not the MO1, as he is either MO2, MO3, or MO4.”

His theory, however, did not go down well with other Facebook users who reminded Nawawi of certain excerpts from the DoJ report, which provides a detailed explanation of who MO1 is.

This includes the DoJ’s claim that MO1 is a “high-ranking official in the Malaysian government who also held a position of authority with 1MDB”, and that the individual was a relative of Riza Aziz, the stepson of Najib.

Former Langkawi Umno women’s wing member Anina Saadudin, in a statement today, also pointed this out, and slammed Nawawi for linking MO1 to the Agong, who is Kedah Sultan Tuanku Abdul Halim Mu’adzam Shah

“The Agong has no position in 1MDB, he is not a relative of Riza, and he is not a government official.

“Nawawi’s statement has insulted Kedah’s royal institution. I urge him to immediately issue a public apology to the Agong and the public.

“If he refuses to, I’m sure the rakyat can urge for all the medals given to him by the Kedah royalty to be revoked.”

This is not the first time that Nawawi has made the headlines for his controversial statements.

Previously, he was chastised by the public for claiming that his salary was not paid by the people, but was from the government and that public funds did not belong to the people.