The Leader Of The Opposition has no right to an audience with The Agong, but the Agong must act on the advice of his Prime Minister : Anwar's attempts to become PM via the palace farcical, given that there is a sitting PM (who is not going anywhere)

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                            Al Sultan Abdullah - Foto sumber internet

The comedy of the Malaysian Leader Of The Opposition, Anwar Ibrahim, demanding that the Agong grant him an audience and declare him Prime Minister continues. 

Anwar has given his supporters the impression that the Agong was in a a hurry to see him and install him as prime minister (in place of the sitting prime minister Muhyiddin Yassin); His Majesty however has issued a statement to thank his subjects for their thoughts and prayers, as he continues to regain his fitness.   His Majesty has also advised his subjects to stay safe in the face of COVID.

Anwar Ibrahim, as Leader Of The Opposition, is equal to any of His Majesty's subjects, but he is not the Prime Minister in whom is solely vested the duty to advise His Majesty. That duty includes the duty to advise His Majesty that he has lost the confidence of the majority of the Members of the Dewan Rakyat. There is nothing in The Federal Constitution which provides for anyone, including The Leader Of The Opposition, to advise the Agong of that fact. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Thursday, September 24, 2020

Anwar Ibrahim cannot force an audience on The Agong: Where does it say that the Leader Of The Opposition can demand the Head Of State see him, for any reason ?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                  The Agong need not see Anwar

So much has been said about Anwar Ibrahim's request for an audience with The Agong. The assumption has been that the Agong must grant him an audience. He is however  Leader Of The Opposition and does not ,like the Prime Minister and Cabinet, advise the Agong. He does not therefore have any rights of audience. 

It would be a different matter altogether if the Members of the Dewan Rakyat signal that the sitting Prime Minister no longer commands the confidence of the majority of the members, and that Anwar does instead. 

Meanwhile, the Agomg is not bound by law or convention to grant Anwar an audience, regardless of how loudly Anwar and his supporters demand that the Agong abide by "the procedure". 

The constant references to "PM in waiting" seem to have confused Anwar, and his supporters, and many commentators as to the nature and limits of his position.

TO BE READ WITH 

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Agong insisted on interviewing every MP, after Mahathir resigned in February so why would he accept Anwar's collection of SDs against a sitting Prime Minister?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                  

It was not too long ago, in fact just seven months ago in February this year, after then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir handed in his resignation,that the Yang Dipertuan Agong spent his weekend interviewing government MPs to determine how many of them supported Mahathir's successor Muhyiddin Yassin.

Even after he declared that he was satisfied that the numbers were with Muhyiddin, there was dispute about how the Agong conducted himself. 

This time around (as it has been on a number of occasions in the past) Dr Anwar Ibrahim seeks to convince the Agong with a fistful of statutory declarations that he has the numbers to first demand the King sack Muhyiddin, and then appoint him as the next prime minister of Malaysia. 

Given that recent history the Agong cannot really choose on this occasion to accept evidence in the form of statutory declarations. In fact, as explained last year, the statutory declarations do not mean very much.

It is therefore hard to see how Dr Anwar is going to take Parliament without the usual vote of no confidence against the sitting prime minister. 

TO BE READ WITH 

TO BE READ WITH 

Monday, July 8, 2019

Anwar Ibrahim's solid grip on MPs statutory declarations meaningless: SDs cannot be used to secure a promise

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Muhyiddin, Zahid lash out at fake SDs supporting Anwar;

 probe ordered

The denial by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of  having signed  statutory declarations in support of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim taking over as prime minister beginning July 2 is irrelevant even if it were true.

A uniquely Malaysian innovation, the SD pledging support makes for good theater in the land of the wayang kulit, but otherwise means nothing. A SD is, as its name implies,  a declaration that something is true and for that reason its use is limited to declarations that say,  statements regarding ones name, identity or nationality are true. 
It cannot be used to affirm ones support, affection, undying love or loyalty. These are akin to promises, for which there are contracts or deeds.

So, even if Saudara Dr Anwar Ibrahim obtains SDs of support from all MPs, that fact would mean nothing. He would still have to go back to Parliament, move a vote of no confidence against Mahathir, who would then need to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong  that Parliament should be dissolved and a general election called.

END 

PM in waiting Anwar Ibrahim's Sabah campaign funding : Private jet from Vinod Shekar requires explanation

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

The photograph above shows Dr Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia's Prime Minister in waiting, alighting from

a private jet owned by Vinod Shekar's Petra Group (PetraTara is an amalgamation of Shekar's daughters names). The image is thought to have been captured recently in Sabah, where Anwar has been campaigning for Warisan and Shafie Apdal.

The tail number, T7-VBS, and details are clearer in the images at this link. The images were captured by a plane spotter who states:

Penang Int'l Airport welcomed a frequent VIP visitor to Penang, a private business jet Bombardier BD-700-1A10 Global Express (reg T7-VBS) from Petra Tara group arriving from LGK on Rnwy04 on a hazy afternoon dated 12 August 2020.

The acquisition of private jet is quite a comeback for a Shekar.

This time last year he seemed to have difficulties paying a sum that

would have equalled a fraction of the running costs of his Bombadier G700. Anwar Ibrahim has some explaining to do.




TO BE READ WITH



Court bailiffs unable to arrest corporate figure allegedly conned Irish man in US$108,000
By ZIININE A.S on September 13, 2019


                                                                   Court bailiffs trying to arrest Vinod Sekhar at his house but he is not around.

SHAH ALAM: The court bailiffs could not arrest rubber industry figure Vinod Sekhar who has allegedly conned an Irishman in US$108,000 (about RM449,000).

The Irish man, John Slattery filed a civil suit against Sekhar claiming he paid the US$108,000 to Sekhar in 2017 as an investment in Green Rubber Sdn Bhd, a company which Sekhar was chairperson and founder.

According to Slattery`s lawyer Colin Pereira who sued Sekhar for breach of a contract, neither the judgment debtor nor his family were at home when the court bailiff arrived to arrest him this morning.

“The security guard was unable to confirm where they were. But a check on the judgment debtor Vinod Sekhar`s facebook seems to suggest that he is in London, United Kingdom,” he added.

On 23 August, Malaysiakini reported that Court bailiffs had on Aug 7 raided the house of Vinod Sekhar in Bukit Tunku, Kuala Lumpur and took away valuables worth RM150,000.

The action was taken to fulfill a writ of seizure issued by the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court recently, following the court’s decision to award John Slattery US$108,000 as a full settlement for his suit against the businessperson.

The judgment was made in default on June 11 following Sekhar’s failure to appear before the court, according to the report.

It was also reported that Sekhar had promised the Irishman many positions in three companies including as executive director in Green Rubber Sdn Bhd and as senior vice-president of strategic development in Sekhar’s well-known Petra Group. Sekhar is chair of Petra Group and also the company’s chief executive officer.





“During the interview for these posts, Sekhar had offered my client the opportunity to invest in Green Rubber. He had represented to my client that he was a famous corporate figure and that his father was a prominent figure in the rubber industry.

“However, according to my client, he never mentioned that he was bankrupt.

“My client had then agreed to invest in the company and transferred the sum into Sekhar’s personal bank account on May 16, 2017. However, to date, no shares had been transferred to my client,” the lawyer told the media.

Failing to respond to the court judgment led the court bailiffs to Sekhar’s house in Bukit Tunku to arrest him today but failed as he was not around.

The court had on Aug 13 issued the arrest warrant for Sekhar following his failure to appear before the court.




Sekhar denied the allegations. When contacted by Malaysiakini he said he had nothing to do with the case personally and that it was a matter between Green Rubber as a company and Slattery as a former employee.

The Irishman`s lawyer told Malaysia World News today, if the judgment debtor is in fact overseas, then my client is indeed surprised to learn that he was allowed to leave the country despite the immigration authorities being informed on two occasions that a warrant of arrest had been issued against him.

“My client has asked me to seek clarification again from the immigration authorities and to raise the matter up with MACC, if necessary.

“We have also sought clarification from the Director-General of Insolvency on whether the judgment debtor, as a bankrupt, has obtained consent to leave the country as required by Section 38 of the Insolvency Act,” he said

However, a source told Malaysia World News that Sekhar, who always posts photos of himself with PKR leader Anwar Ibrahim on his Facebook as if he is a close friend to this latter, has many properties or companies in Malaysia and Singapore and he has just bought a factory in Shah Alam with a price of RM10 million, but Malaysia World News could not yet verify whether he bought this property under his name or his wife`s name. How could he be a bankrupt man, then?Vinod Sekhar with Anwar Ibrahim in a pic he posted on his Facebook

Anwar Ibrahim cannot force an audience on The Agong: Where does it say that the Leader Of The Opposition can demand the Head Of State see him, for any reason ?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                  The Agong need not see Anwar

So much has been said about Anwar Ibrahim's request for an audience with The Agong. The assumption has been that the Agong must grant him an audience. He is however  Leader Of The Opposition and does not ,like the Prime Minister and Cabinet, advise the Agong. He does not therefore have any rights of audience. 

It would be a different matter altogether if the Members of the Dewan Rakyat signal that the sitting Prime Minister no longer commands the confidence of the majority of the members, and that Anwar does instead. 

Meanwhile, the Agomg is not bound by law or convention to grant Anwar an audience, regardless of how loudly Anwar and his supporters demand that the Agong abide by "the procedure". 

The constant references to "PM in waiting" seem to have confused Anwar, and his supporters, and many commentators as to the nature and limits of his position.

TO BE READ WITH 

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Agong insisted on interviewing every MP, after Mahathir resigned in February so why would he accept Anwar's collection of SDs against a sitting Prime Minister?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                  

It was not too long ago, in fact just seven months ago in February this year, after then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir handed in his resignation,that the Yang Dipertuan Agong spent his weekend interviewing government MPs to determine how many of them supported Mahathir's successor Muhyiddin Yassin.

Even after he declared that he was satisfied that the numbers were with Muhyiddin, there was dispute about how the Agong conducted himself. 

This time around (as it has been on a number of occasions in the past) Dr Anwar Ibrahim seeks to convince the Agong with a fistful of statutory declarations that he has the numbers to first demand the King sack Muhyiddin, and then appoint him as the next prime minister of Malaysia. 

Given that recent history the Agong cannot really choose on this occasion to accept evidence in the form of statutory declarations. In fact, as explained last year, the statutory declarations do not mean very much.

It is therefore hard to see how Dr Anwar is going to take Parliament without the usual vote of no confidence against the sitting prime minister. 

TO BE READ WITH 

TO BE READ WITH 

Monday, July 8, 2019

Anwar Ibrahim's solid grip on MPs statutory declarations meaningless: SDs cannot be used to secure a promise

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Muhyiddin, Zahid lash out at fake SDs supporting Anwar;

 probe ordered

The denial by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of  having signed  statutory declarations in support of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim taking over as prime minister beginning July 2 is irrelevant even if it were true.

A uniquely Malaysian innovation, the SD pledging support makes for good theater in the land of the wayang kulit, but otherwise means nothing. A SD is, as its name implies,  a declaration that something is true and for that reason its use is limited to declarations that say,  statements regarding ones name, identity or nationality are true. 
It cannot be used to affirm ones support, affection, undying love or loyalty. These are akin to promises, for which there are contracts or deeds.

So, even if Saudara Dr Anwar Ibrahim obtains SDs of support from all MPs, that fact would mean nothing. He would still have to go back to Parliament, move a vote of no confidence against Mahathir, who would then need to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong  that Parliament should be dissolved and a general election called.

END 

The Conference Of Rulers can ruin Anwar Ibrahim's "make me PM at the Palace party"- the Malaysian Constitution says so.......

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 



While the focus has been on the Agong, it is important to remember that the Agong is chosen by his brother rulers, who serve in that role on rotation. 

While it is true that Agong as constitutional head of the federation is vested with the power to appoint the prime minister, the head of government, the Constitution does constrain him in a number of ways.

One example can be found in Article 38(6)(b) which states: 

Article 38. Conference of Rulers.

(6)The members of the Conference of Rulers may act in their discretion in any proceedings relating to the following functions, that is to say:

(a)the election or removal from office of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the election of the Timbalan Yang di-Pertuan Agong;

(b)the advising on any appointment;

It appears then that the Conference of Rulers can, in their discretion, act, in any proceeding, including any appointment. 

It is hard to see why their royal highnesses would not want to act with regards the appointment of PM Anwar Ibrahim (if and when that eventuates), especially when it is likely to be in somewhat unorthodox circumstances. 

TO BE READ WITh 

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

Agong insisted on interviewing every MP, after Mahathir resigned in February so why would he accept Anwar's collection of SDs against a sitting Prime Minister?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                 The Agong and his Attorney General Idris Harun

It was not too long ago, in fact just seven months ago in February this year, after then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir handed in his resignation,that the Yang Dipertuan Agong spent his weekend interviewing government MPs to determine how many of them supported Mahathir's successor Muhyiddin Yassin.

Even after he declared that he was satisfied that the numbers were with Muhyiddin, there was dispute about how the Agong conducted himself. 

This time around (as it has been on a number of occasions in the past) Dr Anwar Ibrahim seeks to convince the Agong with a fistful of statutory declarations that he has the numbers to first demand the King sack Muhyiddin, and then appoint him as the next prime minister of Malaysia. 

Given that recent history the Agong cannot really choose on this occasion to accept evidence in the form of statutory declarations. In fact, as explained last year, the statutory declarations do not mean very much.

It is therefore hard to see how Dr Anwar is going to take Parliament without the usual vote of no confidence against the sitting prime minister. 

TO BE READ WITH 

TO BE READ WITH 

Monday, July 8, 2019

Anwar Ibrahim's solid grip on MPs statutory declarations meaningless: SDs cannot be used to secure a promise

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Muhyiddin, Zahid lash out at fake SDs supporting Anwar;

 probe ordered

The denial by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of  having signed  statutory declarations in support of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim taking over as prime minister beginning July 2 is irrelevant even if it were true.

A uniquely Malaysian innovation, the SD pledging support makes for good theater in the land of the wayang kulit, but otherwise means nothing. A SD is, as its name implies,  a declaration that something is true and for that reason its use is limited to declarations that say,  statements regarding ones name, identity or nationality are true. 
It cannot be used to affirm ones support, affection, undying love or loyalty. These are akin to promises, for which there are contracts or deeds.

So, even if Saudara Dr Anwar Ibrahim obtains SDs of support from all MPs, that fact would mean nothing. He would still have to go back to Parliament, move a vote of no confidence against Mahathir, who would then need to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong  that Parliament should be dissolved and a general election called.

END 

Agong insisted on interviewing every MP, after Mahathir resigned in February so why would he accept Anwar's collection of SDs against a sitting Prime Minister?

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

                                 The Agong and his Attorney General Idris Harun

It was not too long ago, in fact just seven months ago in February this year, after then Prime Minister Dr Mahathir handed in his resignation,that the Yang Dipertuan Agong spent his weekend interviewing government MPs to determine how many of them supported Mahathir's successor Muhyiddin Yassin.

Even after he declared that he was satisfied that the numbers were with Muhyiddin, there was dispute about how the Agong conducted himself. 

This time around (as it has been on a number of occasions in the past) Dr Anwar Ibrahim seeks to convince the Agong with a fistful of statutory declarations that he has the numbers to first demand the King sack Muhyiddin, and then appoint him as the next prime minister of Malaysia. 

Given that recent history the Agong cannot really choose on this occasion to accept evidence in the form of statutory declarations. In fact, as explained last year, the statutory declarations do not mean very much.

It is therefore hard to see how Dr Anwar is going to take Parliament without the usual vote of no confidence against the sitting prime minister. 

TO BE READ WITH 

TO BE READ WITH 

Monday, July 8, 2019

Anwar Ibrahim's solid grip on MPs statutory declarations meaningless: SDs cannot be used to secure a promise

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Muhyiddin, Zahid lash out at fake SDs supporting Anwar;

 probe ordered

The denial by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin and Datuk Seri Dr Ahmad Zahid Hamidi of  having signed  statutory declarations in support of Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim taking over as prime minister beginning July 2 is irrelevant even if it were true.

A uniquely Malaysian innovation, the SD pledging support makes for good theater in the land of the wayang kulit, but otherwise means nothing. A SD is, as its name implies,  a declaration that something is true and for that reason its use is limited to declarations that say,  statements regarding ones name, identity or nationality are true. 
It cannot be used to affirm ones support, affection, undying love or loyalty. These are akin to promises, for which there are contracts or deeds.

So, even if Saudara Dr Anwar Ibrahim obtains SDs of support from all MPs, that fact would mean nothing. He would still have to go back to Parliament, move a vote of no confidence against Mahathir, who would then need to advise the Yang DiPertuan Agong  that Parliament should be dissolved and a general election called.

END 

"LGOPRNR" is free speech, questioning the NSW LPAB and its College Of Law offends community standards : One more example of why there can be no equality before the Bench and Australian Bar until Asian lawyers can behave as badly as whites

by Ganesh Sahathevan

News.com.au and others have reported:


A top Sydney barrister has got into a legal battle of his own over the “offensive” number plate on his bright yellow Lamborghini, which reads: “LGOPNR”.
Peter Lavac said most people would never connect the dots and realise his number plate was cheekily saying “leg opener”.
But at least one person did, in fact, connect those dots, and soon Transport NSW was calling for his plates to be removed.
“Tough s***,” Mr Lavac unapologetically told The Sunday Telegraph.

Transport NSW gave him 18 days to change his number plate, writing in a letter: “Transport for NSW determined that these number plates could be considered offensive and must be returned.”

From Palm Beach in Sydney’s northern beaches, Mr Lavac fought for his right to keep the number plate and challenged the letter in his local court on September 1.He argued it was a free speech issue.

Suffice to say that this writer is giving the story above serious consideration in his quest to educate himself as to what makes a person fit and proper for admission to practise law in NSW and Australia. Readers may recall he has been found by the NSW LPAB , and the College Of Law (exercising Rule 19 Certificate rights) to have offended community standards by questioning them (as student and journalist) about poor PLT  course content and delivery. 

He is also wondering if the Chief Justice Tom Bathurst and his officers at the NSW LPAB would tolerate the above sort of " cheekiness" from an any non-white lawyer. 

TO BE READ WITH 

Tuesday, May 19, 2020

No equality before the Australian Bench and at the Australian Bar until Asian lawyers can behave as badly as whites

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Beasley SC: one last bite. Tempting to think that Asian lawyers also can indulge in this type of witticism, but it will probably be career ending.

Readers  may recall  that this writer has been found not fit and proper for admission  to practise at the Supreme Court Of NSW, and subsequently all other Australian jurisdictions. 
The decision of the  NSW Legal Profession Admission Board chaired the Chief Justice Of NSW, Tom Bathurst,  is based on findings that include this writer's part in an international conspiracy which involved corrupting journalists at the ABC 4 Corners programme (see story below).

The findings included a significant amount of evidence about this writer's tendency to angry, threatening and intimidating behaviour. That evidence included complaints about the College Of Law (which are now being investigated in Malaysia) and of this writer's work as a journalist. 

Faced with the findings of such an eminent body as the NSW LPAB and the Chief Justice a thorough examination of conduct and conscience has been embarked upon, which has naturally included looking to one's betters for examples of proper behaviour.  
Research had led to the following examples:

From Richard Beasely SC, as quoted by Justinian:

If you were on death row what would you request for your last meal? 

Barnaby Joyce's testicles.

Then, the lawyers named in this story from the SMH dated 15 September 2018, headlined "Police investigate following top legal eagles' swanky party" . 

The violence described in the SMH story frightens even this writer despite his close to 40 years experience in the martial arts, a 5th Dan Black Belt in taekwondo,and ongoing training in full contact combat sports. 


It does appear as if the Australian Bar and Bench, while outwardly de-crying the lack of  "diversity", expect Asians and other non-whites to conduct themselves like house servants or plantation slaves, always obedient and circumspect, and never ever like their white masters. 

END

Business

Bizarre claims used to deny lawyer certificate

Ben Butler

BEN BUTLER, EXCLUSIVE

812 words

17 January 2019

The Australian

AUSTLN

Australian

14

English

© 2019 News Limited. All rights reserved.

The body overseen by Chief Justice Tom Bathurst responsible for deciding who can practise law in NSW relied on a wildly defamatory Malaysian blog depicting ABC journalists, former British prime minister Tony Blair, financier George Soros and others as part of a global conspiracy when deciding to deny a would-be solicitor a certificate to practise.

Chief Justice Bathurst and Legal Practitioner Admission Board executive officer Louise Pritchard declined to answer The Australian’s questions about how the article came into the board’s hands and why its members felt the conspiracy-laden material could be relied upon as part of a decision to deny Sydney man Ganesh Sahathevan admission as a lawyer. Nor would either say which of the 10 members of the LPAB, three of whom are serving NSW Supreme Court judges, was on the deciding panel.

Ms Pritchard has left her role at the LPAB since The Australian began making inquiries in September. The article, published in December 2017 on website The Third Force, accuses Mr Sahathevan of engaging in a conspiracy to attack then Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak.

Mahathir Mohamad, who returned as prime minister after toppling Mr Najib in elections held last May, is also smeared as a participant in the globe-spanning conspiracy.

Mr Najib was under pressure at the time over the country’s sovereign wealth fund, 1MDB, which the US Department of Justice says has been looted of billions of dollars that was spent on property, art, jewels and the Leonardo DiCaprio film, The Wolf of Wall Street.

Malaysian authorities have charged Mr Najib with dozens of corruption offences that could attract decades in jail over his role in the 1MDB scandal, which allegedly included the flow of about $US1 billion through his personal bank account.

The article’s author, Malaysian political operative and Najib loyalist Raggie Jessy, also accused Rewcastle-Brown, Stein and Besser of receiving money, totalling millions of dollars, to participate in a Four Corners program exposing the 1MDB scandal that aired on the ABC in March 2016.

There is no suggestion any of Mr Jessy’s bizarre allegations are true. However, the LPAB cited the piece when denying Mr Sahathevan admission as a lawyer in an undated and unsigned set of reasons sent to him on August 3 last year.

It used the article as evidence in a passage dealing with legal conflicts between Mr Sahathevan, who has largely worked in the past as a journalist, his former employer, Malaysia’s Sun Media Group, and the company’s owner, tycoon Vincent Tan.

In that context, the board said the Third Force article reported “that Mr Sahathevan was investigated for blackmail, extortion, bribery and defamation”. While the article claims that blackmail, extortion, bribery and defamation “are but some of the transgressions many from around the world attribute” to Mr Sahathevan, The Australian was unable to find any reference in it to an investigation into him on these grounds.

It is unclear why the board felt the need to rely on the article, as it also made adverse findings about Mr Sahathevan’s character based on a series of other allegations including that he used “threatening and intimidating” language in emails to the College of Law and the NSW Attorney General and did not disclose his sacking from a previous job to the board.

Mr Sahathevan has denied the allegations in correspondence with the board. The board also cited evidence that one of Mr Sahathevan’s blogs on Malaysian politics was banned by the Najib regime as indicating his poor character.

In an email to Chief Justice Bathurst, sent on August 30, Rewcastle-Brown said her site, Sarawak Report, which exposed much of the 1MDB scandal, was banned by the Malaysian government.

“I along with other critics of the 1MDB scandal (which includes Mr Sahathevan) became the target of immense state-backed vilification, intimidation and online defamation campaigns on behalf of the Malaysian government,” she said.

She said the board’s use of the Third Force article against Mr Sahathevan displayed “a troubling level of misjudgment and poor quality research, giving a strong impression that someone seeking to find reasons to disqualify this candidate simply went through the internet looking for ‘dirt’ against him”.

“The Third Force has consistently been by far the most outlandish, libellous, vicious and frankly ludicrous of all the publications that were commissioned as part of former prime minister Najib Razak’s self-proclaimed ‘cyber army’ which he paid (and continues to pay) to defame his perceived enemies and critics,” she said.

Besser, who now works in the ABC’s London bureau, told The Australian: “It’s clearly nonsense and comes from the darkest corners of some pretty wild Malaysian conspiracy theorists.”Mr Sahathevan’s application is to be reconsidered at an LPAB meeting next month.

News Ltd.

Document AUSTLN0020190116ef1h0003