Mystery surrounding College Of Law Australia's leadership coincides with growing list of unanswered questions about the College 's misconduct in Malaysia, and CEO Neville Carter's abuse of of his power to issue Rule 19 certificates in an attempt to prevent any investigation into that misconduct

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

      CEO Neville Carter,and chairman Joseph Catanzariti have gone on an overseas expansion funded by FEE HELP. The expansion into Asia has been disastrous, and involves some inexplicable transactions

Who leads The College of Law Australia ?



First this published  in  Lawyers' Weekly February 2024:
Angie Zandstra, the acting chief executive officer for the College of Law Australia, shared her insights on leadership in the legal profession and the significance of actively supporting and showing up for one’s staff members.


Then this , also in Lawyers' Weekly in  August 2024:
‘There seems to be greater enthusiasm and confidence’: Acting CEO of the College of Law on current law students

Ann-Maree David, the acting CEO of the College of Law, delineates the remarkable shift she is witnessing in law students’ mindsets, dynamics, and attitudes.

However Angie Zandstra still describes herself as CEO The College of Law Australia on her LinkedIn profile.


Meanwhile the The College of Law Australia website site still says:

Neville Carter AM
Chief Executive Officer and Principal, Executive Governor

This mystery is seen in context of the   matter of  CEO Neville Carter's attempt to demand that questions  raised  by this writer , as a journalist, about The College of Law Australia and his own  conduct in Malaysia be withdrawn. 

As previously reported, Carter attempted to do so in a letter to this writer ,who was then a student at the College Of Law,  demanding that questions about his conduct and that of the College in Malaysia (or questions that could be construed as threatening and intimidating ,as he put it ) be withdrawn  before he released this writer's PLT certificate of completion of The College of Law Australia's PLT course.

His letter was made public, and remains in the public domain ,but there is no indication that the matter has been disclosed in The College of Law Australia annual reports, and to its insurers given the implications for the College and its directors' operational and legal risks. The matter of the College's Malaysian scandal was made public in Malaysia in 2019.

TIO BE READ WITH 

Bar Council education ‘JV’ must be clarified

By Editor , in Scandal on July 19, 2019 . Tagged width: College of Law , Fareed Gafoor , Malaysian Bar

KUALA LUMPUR, July 19 – The Malaysian Bar Council launched its first education venture, a LLM in Malaysian Legal Practise (LLM), last year in collaboration with the College Of Law Australia.

The LLM does not seem to have the approval of Malaysia’s Legal Professional Qualifying Board (LPQB) but the website for the course, which is hosted in Australia, prominently displays the Bar Council crest.

The crest has not been used before to promote a course of study, and queries put to Bar Council President Fareed Gafoor about the use of the crest have been acknowledged but remain unanswered.

NMT has however sighted an email from Fareed dated Friday, May 24, 2019 with regards the LLM and the use of the crest where he states:

Dear Rajen,

We can’t remain silent on this.

Abdul Fareed Bin Abdul Gafoor

Sent from my iPad

It is understood that “Rajen” refers to  Rajen Devaraj, Chief Executive Officer of the Bar Council Secretariat in Kuala Lumpur.

The Bar has remained silent for nearly 2 months since.

Key person suddenly retired during extensive query

The College of Law used to be represented in Malaysia by its Director, Peter Tritt. Tritt have been queried extensively about the LLM and about the College’s business in Malaysia but has refused to provide answers. Tritt has been based in Kuala Lumpur since 2017 but announced on Friday that he had “retired” from the College on 30 June 2019.

It is understood that Tritt has forwarded queries sent him to his head office in Sydney and hence it appears that Tritt is under orders from his Chief Executive, Neville Carter, to remain silent.

Questionable advertising claims?

In advertising on the College’s website Carter has claimed that he had established a Professional Legal Training course for Malaysian Law students seeking admission to practise in Malaysia. There seems to be no evidence of such a course, or of any national level training course for the existing Certificate of Legal Practise.

Carter has also claimed to have produced the “inaugural” Handbook in Legal Practise for Malaysia, in the late 80s. A search of the main law libraries in Malaysia directed by the Chief Registrar, Federal Court Malaysia, has not found any such handbook.

He has also claimed to have, during that time to have identified and addressed “gaps” in Malaysian legal practise, but not even those in practice during that period and since have ever heard of him. Nor are senior practitioners aware of  “gaps” that needed that to be addressed by external consultants.

As CEO of the College Carter  has ultimate responsibility for the College’s Malaysian operation headed by Tritt and variously named the “College Of Law Asia Pacific” and the “College Of Law Asia”. A search by NMT has not revealed any entities registered under those names in Malaysia or in Australia, not even a foreign entities registered to conduct business in Malaysia.

Meanwhile the College, in collaboration with the Bar Council continues to sell its LLM and other courses in Malaysia, deriving a fee income from Malaysian courses.

-NMT

Posted by Ganesh Sahathevan at 6:48 PM 

Maxis, Astro, Bumi Armada refusal to inform market of changes in shareholdings raises serious questions about their related party transactions with the late Ananda Krishnan and his associates

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 
       Donations to the Prime Minister and Finance Minister Anwar's Ibrahim's Madani Fund does not change the fact that rules are being breached 

Two months have passed since Tatparanandam Ananda Krishnan passed away and yet the boards of Maxis, ASTRO, and Bumi Armada have yet to inform the Bursa Malaysia of the inevitable, even if unfortunate, change in substantial shareholder.



Bursa Malaysia continuing disclosure rules require that Maxis, ASTRO, Bumi Armada and any other company that he may have an interest of 5% or more make immediate disclosure of changes in shareholdings given the demise of controlling shareholder Tatparanandam Anandaa Krishnan.As it stands the directors of theose companies are in breach of Bursa rules , for there has yet to be any announcement to the Bursa Malaysia.


Additionally ,all three companies are required to gain shareholder approval for related party transactions, which they have, and all the resolutions concerning the related party transactions feature with a high degree of frequency the name Tatparanandam  

Anandaa Krishnan ( or TAK for Tatparanandam Anandaa Krishnan). His demise and the existence of the resolutions approving the transactions in his favour remain in place, and hence there is now a question as to who gains from those related party transactions.

END 

To Be Read With 

Ananda Krishnan's death casts a frightful shadow over the ownership of his quasi-GLC assets in Malaysia, and the conduct of his lieutenants

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

    Ananda Krishnan circa 1968.Photo courtesy of former business partner and blood brother,Ken                   McMahon of Minsec. Photo taken at the McMahon's home in Seaforth, Sydney

While much is being made of the waelth and death of Malaysia's second richest man, Ananda Krishnan, the issue of who takes charge of his very substantial assets in Malaysia which include MAXIS, Asto, MEASAT and Bumi Armada , mostly held via his private company, Usaha Tegas Sdn Bhd, is being left unsaid. In fact, his death casts a frightful shadow over the ownership of these assets, given their quas-GLC status, either having substantial Malaysian Government shareholding, and almost invariably dependent on licenses from the Malaysian Government. WHile Ananda and his partners did very well out of that status, his demise means that it will be for his lieutenants to attempt and emulate the charisma of their master. As the photo above and the story behind it suggests, that would be a very difficult thing to do.

Then, as previously reported (see story below) are various adverse findings against them, made at a time when they enjoyed the shield of his virtual immunity, which is of course no more. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Thursday, November 28, 2024

Ananda Krishnan is dead, review of trustee Chan Chee Beng's position long overdue, action by regulators in Malaysia should no longer be forestalled

Credit Corp Ltd (ASX: CCP) has undisclosed privacy issues -Credit Crop says the law is on its side, and it is permitted to access private phone numbers to interrogate anyone , not just debtors. in furtherance of its business

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

 

In the weeks before Christmas this writer received a call from a person who did not identify herself, and refused to say how she got my number.  She went on however demanding details about another person who I do not know. After much questioning the caller told me that  I was being contacted because that person  and I share the same apartment block  address. 

The call was then passed on to someone else who also refused to say where he was calling from, and then agreed to identify his company only if I promised to provide the information provided. I did not and he then reluctantly admitted that he was calling on behalf of the ASX listed debt collector, Credit Corp Ltd (ASX: CCP).

Credit Corp's representatives  were  aggressive in their approach, refusing to  to say  how and from whom  my contact details were obtained. 

Credit Corp were not pursuing this writer on behalf of a client, and Credit Corp's representatives insisted that they had a legal right to information about me, and to  demand the information requested.

The callers refused to say how and from whom they obtained my contact details and it was only when I complained directly to Credit Corps Chairman, Board and Chief Executive that I received an explanation in writing, in which Credit Corp  named another company,iD4me as its source. Credit Corp says iD4me collects data by consent but this is false, for this writer cannot ever recall being contacted by iD4me.

It is obvious that Credit Corp has exposed itself to liability for breach of privacy as as result of its aggressive approach to debt collection. The ASX and its investors have not been informed of this quite significant risk.

  

END 

Apple says iPhone 11 cannot handle iOS 18.2 update, admits that loading iOS 18.2 update will destroy phone -a problem for Telstra and other carriers who offer iPhones, Telstra and others must inform users of the useful life of any iPhone they try to sell

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Apple has admitted to this Apple iPhone11 user that its iPhone 11 should be "upgraded" for it cannot handle the iOS 18.2 update. In fact Apple "Genius Bar" techs made this user's iPhone 11 inoperable after trying to load the update multiple times.

Tim Cook and Apple never disclosed that the iPhone 11 had a 5 year life span when the "11" was launched. He has misled consumer worldwide. Apple iPhones are also sold by carriers such as Australia's Telstra, and they too would be guilty of misleading customers if they fail to inform customers of any iPhones useful life. 

END 

See Also

https://lnkd.in/gQDnbpB7


https://lnkd.in/gtvmzv7S

Former Agong's home detention decree is for all intents and purposes final- Courts, judges and the Pardons Board cannot revoke it Najib can be sent home

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Mohamad Nizar, son of Najib Razak, says the Sultan Of Pahang's decree to send his father home has been communicated to him

The confusion that has  engulfed  Anwar Ibrahim and his government caused by Anwar's  management of the issue of  Najib Razak's home detention (the so called addendum issue) has become worse with the publication of  a decree by the former Agong, the Sultan Of Pahang, expressing the royal desire that Najib serve the rest of his current jail term at home. 

There has been commentary about the role of the courts and the Pardons Board with regards that decree but the commentary ignores the fact a royal decree is not justiciable, and in practical terms no court is likely to want to contradict it. 

Najib can be sent home, and Anwar Ibrahim cannot use  the judicial system to evade the consequences. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Friday, January 3, 2025

Anwar Ibrahim's government sinks into confusion in an attempt to deny Najib Razak a royal pardon by popular demand

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                    Anwar caught between an addendum and a pardon

The New Straits Times has reported:


"The Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) respects and follows the statement issued by His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong regarding the prerogative powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong as outlined in Article 42(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution, which clearly directs that any party seeking a pardon must submit an application to the Pardons Board and not through any gathering or any unauthorised channel," it said in a statement.


"In respect of the statement issued by His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and to maintain public safety and order, PDRM urges the public not to participate in any gatherings organised by any party," it added.

The 'Solidarity with Najib Razak' gathering is set to take place at the Palace of Justice, Putrajaya next Monday.Anwar Ibrahim himself has advised his people, with regards the statement issued by the Palace to “Read, understand and accept it,”However, Anwar himself informed Parliament that the then King Muhammad V told him that " he had followed(his) court trial and said it was a clear travesty of justice", and that he would grant him a pardon.


It follows that the King can listen to whatever or whoever he pleases and grant royal pardons as he sees fit. Obstructing a rally intended to communicate to the Monarch public sentiment can then be seen as interfering with His Majesty's pleasure.


To Be Read With

Saturday, December 17, 2022

Malaysia's PM Anwar Ibrahim quotes Shakespeare and confirms suspicion that his royal pardon is invalid- Muhammad V, then Agong, had no power to grant a pardon on his own, without advice from the Pardons Board , an invalid pardon disqualifies Anwar from holding office, or sitting as MP

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

It was meant to be political theatre but Malaysia's PM Anwar Ibrahim quoting  Shakespeare appears  to have confirmed suspicion that his royal pardon is invalid. The pardon was granted in 2018 by Muhammad V, then Agong, with regards Anwar's conviction for the crime of sodomy. 

There were suspicions at the time, given the speed with which the pardon was granted, that Muhammad V had acted outside his powers. The Agong has no power to grant a pardon on his own accord, and can only grant a pardon on the  advice of the Pardons Board.

In parliament today, expressing a desire to put the matter on record in Hansard Anwar said, after quoiting Shakespeare about the words of idiots: 

"The king at the time had called me when I was still in the rehabilitation centre, and he told me that he would give me a full pardon.

"He said he had followed my court trial and said it was a clear travesty of justice. That was the phrase he used.

An invalid pardon disqualifies Anwar from holding office, or sitting in Parliament as a MP.

TO BE READ WITH

Anwar: King granted my pardon on his own accord, called it 'clear travesty of justice'

By Arfa Yunus, Teh Athira Yusof and Hana Naz Harun - December 20, 2022 @ 3:25pm

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim did not ask for the royal pardon granted to him in 2018, the Dewan Rakyat heard today. - Pic courtesy of Information Ministry

KUALA LUMPUR: Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim did not ask for the royal pardon granted to him in 2018, the Dewan Rakyat heard today.

The prime minister said it was the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Sultan Muhammad V, who took the initiative to grant him the royal pardon.

"The king at the time had called me when I was still in the rehabilitation centre, and he told me that he would give me a full pardon.

"He said he had followed my court trial and said it was a clear travesty of justice. That was the phrase he used.

MORE NEWS

• Anwar: 'Prudent spending under my government'

• Sultan Nazrin grants audience to PM Anwar at Istana Kinta

• Anwar: 5G rollout needs to be reviewed

• Seeking immediate royal pardon mocks the entire judicial process

"I want to make it clear, on the record, in the hansard," he said when presenting the Consolidated Fund (Expenditure on Account) bill in Dewan Rakyat, today.

He also said there were breaches in the principles of justice, including coercing individuals into becoming witnesses or opening investigations even before a police report was lodged.

The issue of his royal pardon was raised by opposition leader, Datuk Seri Hamzah Zainudin (PN-Larut) in his debate during the vote of confidence to the prime minister yesterday.

Anwar (PH-Tambun) was jailed for six years for sodomy in 1999 and, a year later, another nine years for corruption.

He was freed in 2004 after Malaysia's top court overturned his sodomy conviction. However, he was imprisoned a second time for sodomy in 2015.

Sultan Muhammad V granted Anwar a full pardon in May 2018