Thursday, April 27, 2017

Illegality may prevent London Arbitration Court from making a consent award in the IPIC-1MDB matter-Settlement may be denied

by Ganesh Sahathevan




Settlement weakens DOJ's case



IPIC informed the LSE on Monday:


International Petroleum Investment Company PJSC (IPIC), Aabar Investments PJS (Aabar), the Minister of Finance (Incorporated) Malaysia (MoF Inc.) and 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) are pleased to announce that an agreement has been reached between all parties that provides for a settlement in respect to the arbitration proceedings at the London Court of International Arbitration (the Settlement). The agreement is conditional on the Arbitration Tribunal making a consent award by 31 May 2017.


Meanwhile, a  senior figure in the Malaysian Government and ruling UMNO ,Puad Zarkashi, has said publicly that the settlement is intended to defeat a criminal investigation by the US Department of Justice ,and other national enforcement agencies into 1 MDB, the Malaysian Government and Najib Razak , the Prime Minister and Finance Minister: 

"This arbitration settlement has weakened the US DOJ civil suit and claims that 1MDB's funds were stolen," said Umno supreme council member Mohd Puad Zakarshi in a statement today.Mohd Puad is also the director-general of the Information Ministry's Special Affairs Division (Jasa).

While the rules governing arbitration courts are complex, it is hard to see that the London Court Of International  Arbitration  would want  to be a party to a  consent award where at least one party has made public that the award will be used as a means to defeat a a criminal investigation.To make matters worse, this is a matter that has been very widely publicized. worldwide and it would be impossible for anyone, including the arbitrators in this matter, to deny knowledge of what is intended.

END




Other references:

1MDB -IPIC settlement: 1MDB insists that IPIC will be paid out of "units" guaranteed by IPIC itself:-IPIC now implicated in money laundering







3 comments:

  1. Sir, I find your article interesting, perhaps because I am not a lawyer. My understanding is that there are 3 main formats: mediation, arbitration and litigation. In mediation, if both parties agree on an issue, the mediator will allow it. The same applies for arbitration and litigation too. Furthermore, as I understand the formats, other parties may be rule to have no locus standi. Isn't it a simple matter for all the parties to simply affirm that Zarkashi is a buffoon without locus standi in the matter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There may have been discussions where this person may have been involved but when the submission is made to the London Arbitration Court is would be a submission by IPIC and !MDB+MOF Inc,and that is what will matter.As you can see from the LSE announcement, the settlement is conditional ie cannot happen until and unless the LCIA hands down a consent award.

      Delete
  2. My Expression
    thanks for the blog very interesting
    I understand the formats, other parties may be rule to have no locus standi. Isn't it a simple matter for all the parties to simply affirm that Zarkashi is a buffoon without locus standi in the matter?
    thanks you!
    gclub casino
    golden slot mobile
    gclub

    ReplyDelete