‘Who gained the most: MO1 or Jho Low?’

lim-kit-siang_jho-low_1mdb_600new

PETALING JAYA: The DAP’s Lim Kit Siang has questioned whether Malaysian police will investigate the connection between “Malaysian Official 1” and Penang-born businessman Jho Low, and asked: “Who was the main beneficiary of the 1MDB scandal – ‘MO1’ or Jho Low?”

In a statement today, Lim also questioned if the police would make use of evidence and documents produced by the US Justice Department in a recent court filing seeking the forfeiture of US$1 billion in assets allegedly acquired with funds stolen from 1Malaysia Development Berhad.

Jho Low, whose full name is Low Taek Jho, is alleged by the Justice Department to have been behind the embezzlement and money-laundering activities of as much as US$3 billion.

In his statement today, Lim also questioned the existence of “five recommendations” by the Public Accounts Committee for police investigations into 1Malaysia Development Berhad.

He said he had checked the Public Accounts Committee report and confirmed that it had made only one specific recommendation for police investigation.

This was that 1MDB’s former chief executive, Shahrol Azral Ibrahim Halmi, should bear responsibility for the 1MDB management constraints and weaknesses and that he and others in the management should be investigated.

In a statement today, Lim took issue with remarks by the Inspector-General of Police, Khalid Abu Bakar, and “his revelation that the Malaysian police have completed the first phase of their investigation into 1MDB, which is restricted to the five recommendations by the Public Accounts Committee as ordered by the cabinet”.

Lim said the PAC report did contain five recommendations – but these “had nothing to do with police investigation” but were concerned with the management of 1MDB.

“Have the Cabinet and IGP misunderstood the PAC Report on 1MDB as to cause the Cabinet to restrict police investigation to five non-existing recommendations to the police?,” Lim said.

Lim also posed eight other questions relating to the police investigations such as why the police had not made use of evidence and documents given in the PAC Report, the Auditor-General’s Report on 1MDB and in a court filing by the US Justice Department seeking seizure of US$1 billion in assets allegedly acquired with funds stolen
from 1MDB.

He questioned the lack of any outcome to police investigations into Shahrol Azral, and asked if the police were using the Auditor-General’s Report on 1MDB as a basis for their investigations.