On 11th October, Malaysia Today carried a post entitled ‘Abuse of power by the Deputy Prime Minister’ that laid out a series of sms’es alleged to have passed between Najib and senior lawyer Shafee Abdullah in relation to Razak Baginda’s arrest and remand in the days before Baginda was charged.
Najib was publicly asked to comment about these sms’es and he never denied the authenticity of the same.
Now, there’s one other exchange of sms’es, this time allegedly between Razak Baginda and Najib. I do not recall Najib himself having ever addressed or denied or admitted the correctness or otherwise of these sms’es directly, as he did with the series of sms’es referred to in the MT posting.
I am referring to the 2 sms’es mentioned at paragraphs 51 and 52 of the first statutory declaration of private investigator Balasubramaniam. Let me reproduce below both paragraphs 51 and 52 of that first statutory declaration.
51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30am. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.
52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30am, Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Najib Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows: “ I am seeing IGP at 11am today … matter will be solved … be cool”.
Like all of you, I am aware of Bala’s second statutory declaration contradicting the first, but we also have to acknowledge that the circumstances surrounding the making and public announcement of the second statutory declaration, and the subsequent disappearance of the maker of both, might make it prudent for us to defer adjudging which of the two statutory declarations narrates the truth until such time that Bala is available to fully disclose and explain the circumstances surrounding the making of both statutory delcarations.
In paragraph 51, Bala claims to have been with Razak Baginda at 6.30am at the latter’s lawyers office on the day that the latter was arrested.
Based on a Star online report, Razak Baginda was arrested on 7th November, 2006.
If the matters averred in both paragraphs of the first statutory declaration as mentioned above are true, it would mean that apart from Bala, Razak Baginda’s lawyer, too, would have seen the sms referred to in paragraph 52.
Which leads me to a question that has been troubling me : Who was that lawyer? Was it Shafee? And if it was not Shafee, then who was it?
The sms’es detailed in the MT posting actually start from the morning of 8th November. I have reproduced the sms’es of 8th November detailed in the MT post below.
Wednesday 8/11/2006
Shafee to Najib (S2N) Date: 8/11/2006 02:59:31
–> Dato Seri, The Razak Baginda thing is troubling me.Can I help? Salam, Shafee
Najib to Shafee (N2S) Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:05
–> I will speak with u later tonight.
S2N Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:31
–> Thank you
–> Met the investigating officer today.Position is serious for RB.The 3 are highly implicated.RB’s case can be fought.There are redeeming features for him.But we need to meet Dato Seri as there are other looming issues at large.But not to worry. Salam > Shafee
N2S Date: 8/11/2006 21:06:11
–> I have spoken to IGP. U can represent n meet RB in court.
The first sms from Shafee to Najib, at a little before 3am on 8th November, would seem to suggest that Shafee was then not yet acting on the case. Forty-five minutes later, Najib responds to say they would talk later. Some three hours later, Shafee sms’es Najib to say that Shafee had met up with the investigating officer. Note that this sms is at 6.28am on the morning of 8th November.
It would appear that Shafee could not have been the lawyer referred to by Bala in paragraphs 51 and 52 of his first statutory declaration. If so, and again assuming that all Bala said was correct, who, then, was that lawyer.
Najib has not denied that eight days later, on 16th November, 2006, Najib sms’d Shafee to say :
–> Pls do not say anything to the press today. i will explain later. RB will have to face a tentative charge but all is not lost.
We know from the sms before this one that Shafee was then in court to represent Razak Baginda.
That same day, 16th November, Razak Baginda was charged under Section 109 of the Penal Code and read together with Section 302 of the same code, with abetment in the murder of Altantuya.
Was this the ‘tentative charge’ that Najib was referring to?
If so, what did Najib mean by ‘tentative’, and why was all ‘not lost’? Who had alerted Najib that Baginda would be slapped with this ‘tentative charge’, and when was this made known to Najib?
And did ‘all is not lost’ have any connection with a meeting that was supposed to take place on the morning that Razak Baginda was arrested, at 11am, as alluded to in the alleged sms in paragraph 52 above?
Did such a meeting take place on the morning that Razak was arrested, or any time after?
Was there such an sms as was alluded to in paragraph 52 of Bala’s first statutory declaration?
And if there was such an sms, who was the lawyer who also read it, as claimed by Bala?
Does anyone know?
Bendrix
October 31, 2008
Wasn’t the lawyer’s name revealed to the Court by Mr Karpal Singh, after the retraction of the first statutory declaration of PI Bala…?
http://www.sun2surf.com/article.cfm?id=24172
Bendrix,
Thanks for the link. It has been most helpful
Jong
October 31, 2008
I have one Question – Why is Najib so concerned and involved in Razak Baginda’s arrest unless he is very much involved, and what authority has he to instruct Shafie to represent RB? He is not family?
N2S Date: 8/11/2006 21:06:11
–> I have spoken to IGP. U can represent n meet RB in court.
su
October 31, 2008
Thanks for the link Bendrix.
So then this also brings up another question, doesn’t it. The Sun article said “..lawyer Dhiren Rene Norendra who had apparently been advising Abdul Razak during the time he was being harassed by Altantuya“.
Was this lawyer ever called to court? If Balasubramaniam, as the PI, was involved in giving his statements because he was involved in such a way that he might know something, then surely the lawyer who was advising Razak during the same period should also be called up.
Another thing is the SMSes about meeting with the IGP. In Bala’s SD, Najib sent a txt at 7.30am on 7Nov saying that he was going to meet the IGP at 11am. To Shafee, the txt was at 9.06pm on 8Nov, saying that he had met with IGP and that Shafee can represent RB.
SO there’s this time difference of about 36 hours between those two SMSes. If Najib DID meet IGP at 11am on the 7th, why did Najib wait till 9pm on the 8th to tell Shafee that he had met with IGP? Did they have more than one meeting?
Assuming that the 11am meeting did happen, couldn’t Najib have told Shafee that he could represent RB on the morning of the 8th when Shafee asked? Or could it be that BECAUSE Shafee asked if he could help, Najib decided to meet with IGP again to see if Shafee was the right person to represent RB?
But assuming that Najib was the one with the final say of who was going to represent RB, why did he have to meet with the IGP prior to making that decision?
You’ve opened a floodgate of questions here Haris.
Wink Wink
Nudibranch
October 31, 2008
Bad karma will be fall the murderer and family…….what goes round must come round….law of the universe.
Estrelita Soliano Grosse
October 31, 2008
That you don’t rest and you chase the truth unrelentingly is truly commendable. Hats off to you, my dear.
Estrelita,
We are all doing what we each can do
sing lau
October 31, 2008
Brother Haris,
May the Lord of heaven bring to your attention infallible evidences to KICK the heinous murderer to justice… i.e. life for life.
Batty
October 31, 2008
Razak Baginda acquitted! Is that the “all is not lost”?
teo siew chin
October 31, 2008
Dear Mr Haris
So… you game to hound Razak Baginda, camp outside his house and beat the truth outta him now that he is out and available?
oops sorry… that is the job of a true-blu-get-em-in-the-gut journalist.
matt
October 31, 2008
And now we know why zaki got promoted in Malaysia it is all about timing and pulling the correct strings.The beginning of the end Malaysia.
muslim
October 31, 2008
Harris , this is the name of the game in Malaysia.
I bet at the end of the day all of them will be set free.
This is Malaysia. The Malay Rule and is their law.
They were Muslim ,but not the Muslim law. Islam And Allah is just the name of the game to this Muslim.
They were the worst kind that the prophet say”Hypocrite”
peng
October 31, 2008
Things are falling apart. The new game with new players are coming into place. Razak Baginda acquitted of the charge???
dragonfly
October 31, 2008
Questions, questions and questions
Those two UTK guys kerja untuk SIAPA SAHAJA?
Those UTK guys TAKE ORDER dari SIAPA SAHAJA?
With the amount of circumstances evidence popping up here and there most Malaysians and half the world at large already knew who was behind this because the link wasn’t called to testify.
Now, we have a KANGAROO COURT that try to protect the guilty ones.
No matter how all these guilty ones try to wiggle out of this ghastly murder, eventually all this will be WRITTEN DOWN IN THE MALAYSIAN HISTORY BOOKS for years to come, where u gonna hide.
To the murderers, may you ROT IN HELL!
and BALA..WHERE R U!! come back and save the pride and dignity of MALAYSIAN people.
dragonfly
October 31, 2008
Dear teo siew sin
better dun suggest that to brother Harris, you guys will be whisk away in a Vitara and C4ed.
amoker
October 31, 2008
Razak is free!
As expected.
Najib is pretty good at this game.
kolaar
October 31, 2008
The very behaviour of a DPM involving himself in an explosive murder case which is here seen as influencing the course of justice is in itself a crime.
By this very action of his he must be shunned by all of civil society as not fit to lead this nation of ours.
The entire political system of ours is so narrow in scope and vision that now we find that only this one ‘unfit guy’ is eligible to lead us. As if this nation is short of good LEADERS.
There was never a PM of this nation with so much baggage before even helming the post.
When I travelled overseas I could without feeling shy mention my PM’s name. Now, it looks like I would just have to change the subject if someone asked me ‘Who is your PM’.
zorro
October 31, 2008
Wouldn’t a police report on this episode be in order?
wandererAUS
October 31, 2008
Why is everyone feeling so upset with the court ruling. We don’t need a prophet to predict the outcome. This is Malaysia justice! One gets a way with murder in Bolehland.
Zaki failed his second test, soon the third will follow.
White Light
October 31, 2008
Coorrection: Only AMNOites and those connected AMNOites get away with murder and all other criem inclding zina.
The law is there to punish those who reveal the truth, the ordinary citizen and opposition party members.
ventura
October 31, 2008
How can the Malaysia people conscious be rest a peace when this matters still pecking within our mind:
1) How can DPM lead when he has such a testimony?
2) What will Malaysia jurisdiction is with Ahmad Zaki appointment?
3) Since the administration is manipulative how can justice are served to the people?
4) If they think they above the laws with its authority how can the poor, unjust and righteousness people come to them to demand justice?
5) How can we trust our tax payer and EPF money with them that is so corruptible and injustice?
6) What is the basis of counter check and balance to the conflict of interest within their personal and family interest to serve the publics?
7) How can we trust the preacher that does not have the testimony to do what their promise?
8) The past 5 years of administration and governing has been a disaster will the people had the confidence again?
9) PKR has taken few months back a manifesto to take over what has happened then?
10) And etc.
These questions not only ensure the confidence but in certain sense dilute the confidence both to the existing and also the current opposition team in managing the economy and prosperity of the nation.
The Royalty have keep their attendance quiet for fear that their right will be strip off. The business and commercial frontier has being shouting to ease their burden of high cost and expense. The government has lost its focus to their people and exertion of race corruption and equality has been igniting to fairly a portion.
What shall we do the average people cry out! One of them standing at the end jeer out “CHANGE THIS GOVERNMENT”!
Is that the solution?
SuuCh
October 31, 2008
Why wasn’t there any investigation on the DPM and his spouse and all others with these allegations? AND to think the whole trial can come to an end today with the acquital with all these questions unanswered. i am not legally trained but is there any chance these allegations will be brought to court another time?? Malaysia has gone to the dogs.
casper
October 31, 2008
Which leads me to a question that has been troubling me : Who was that lawyer? Was it Shafee? And if it was not Shafee, then who was it ?
Look up the name Dhireen Narendra. Shafee didn’t factor on defense team till later. Officially, he has no capacity in current trial, noted ‘fixer’ or otherwise.
DPP have put their best leg forward but within the narrow scope in which charges were levelled, the narrow scope of questioning and cast of players involved – comes as no surprise Razak Baginda walks while the two UTK personnels languish in jail.
Cursory look, it seems very generous the two remaining suspect are prepared to face charges of murder – at the behest of whom – while RB is now out of the equation. And bear in mind, DPP can’t prosecute RB again no matter what holds in the future, what is going to be said/reveal when two remaining suspects put on a defense.
Regards for now.
Paul Warren
October 31, 2008
One other matter you failed to observe was the conduct and behaviour of Razak Baginda, his family and his lawyers immediately after private investigator Balasubramaniam’s first SD.
Any reasonable person under the circumstances that Razak found himself in at the material point in time would have made a humongous amount of noise, screaming out their innocence.
There was absolute silence!!
I am still wondering why!
carmanio
November 1, 2008
refering to ” Paul Warren Says:
October 31, 2008 at 7:42 pm ”
yeah, and contrast that to the early days when u have mrs razak screaming, amongst others, “…it is not my husband who WANTS to be the PM….”
then silence for a few months…
and then that unreported outburst in the courtroom (during recess) when razak baginda kicked doors and supposedly yelled out “matilah kau pak lah!! i tak bersalah!!…”.
then silence for a few months…
then RELEASED!
tselau
November 1, 2008
Too much questions unanswered and yet RB is released. Mana ada keadilan???
Paul Warren
November 1, 2008
carmanio
thanks for the extensions.
and you would have thought that for individuals from within this family with the propensity to screaming out publicly making all those statements to remain silent at a time when one would have expected the most noise should have been made really begets questions.
carmanio
November 1, 2008
paul,
$$$ can be a very very persuasive factor. let razak baginda’s conscience get to him b4 najis&gang get rpk & all malaysians.
i want to bliv that anwar&gang has incriminating proof, and that they r just waiting for najis&gang to continue making “i swear i am innocent” statements. then when the time comes to present those evidence, i can’t imagine the FALL awaiting najis&gang.
remember, rpk had said that hed wait for open court hearing so that he can present the evidence. i want to bliv he has them.
i am rubbing my hands in anticipation…
mary
November 1, 2008
Maybe he’s not saying anything because he doesn’t want to be held in contempt of court? Consider this: what would a lawyer tell a client in a similar position to Razak Baginda?
carmanio
November 2, 2008
dear mary
you dont need a lawyer to teach you to tell the truth. it needs no coaching
mary
November 2, 2008
Hey,
Contempt of court is almost always about jeopardizing a fair trial (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contempt_of_court). Jurors and/or judges are supposed to act on information only heard in the courtroom, but as you and I both know, it’s very possible for rumors and/or published stories to affect the impartiality of these parties. Hence, the possibility of being held in contempt of court, should you meet certain conditions.
It’s not about telling the truth, which you, carmanio, in all your infinite wisdom, seem to have determined Razak Baginda is not doing. There are a lot of questions unanswered, but I hope we can at least speculate fairly whilst bearing in mind we are NOT juror, judge and executioner.
uppercaise
November 3, 2008
How about a very simple explanation re “tentative charge”?
Whoever said this perhaps comes from a time when a murder case must be subject to a preliminary enquiry by a magistrate, where a tentative charge is brought so that the magistrate can decide whether there is a prima facie case to be tried, whereupon the case is referred to the High Court.
Preliminary enquiries were done away with some time ago. Nowadays, when someone is to be charged with murder, the case gets transferred straight away to the High Court for trial.
Maybe, not being practicising criminal lawyers, they forgot this part?
carmnio
November 4, 2008
mary,
i’m suggesting that razak baginda might not be telling the WHOLE truth. i am not the juror, neither are you (i think).
i alomst agree entirely with your
“There are a lot of questions unanswered, but I hope we can at least speculate fairly whilst bearing in mind we are NOT juror, judge and executioner.”. what fairly? i am hoping ‘someone high up’ is incriminated for the things that (i think, i speculate, by listening to rumours etc…totally unsubstantiated with concrete proof yet..) he had done. that’s speculation, my way. “fairly?”, i dont know.