Christchurch Muslim leader Mohammad Alayan wanted Muslim students in separate schools to protect them from the "cultural deficiency" of the NZ school system:Another example of Qaradawi's "castles of jihad",and "shield against surrounding evils".

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Dr Mohammad Alayan

As reported in the Otago Daily Times 28 September 2012, by John Lewis:

Trust chairman Mohammad Alayan said Muslim children attending state secular schools were subjected to an educational environment which pressured them to adopt values which were contradictory to Islamic values, such as evolution theory, sexual relations outside of marriage and drinking .


To alleviate this "cultural deficiency", the trust would establish An-Nur Kiwi Academy (AKA), which would be the South Island's first Islamic school.


Readers of this and the related Sahathevan Blog may recall similar sentiments expressed in a fatwa issued by the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood,Sheik Yusoff Al-Qaradawi:



Home grown jihadis in Florida have Qatar, Muslim Brotherhood antecedents going back to the 90s.-How Muslim schools are to be castles of jihad


In September 2016 Sccop.NZ reported that the Muslim Brotherhood had a presence in Christchurch:


"I do not want Sharia Law in Merivale-Papanui or New Zealand" John Stringer said"and support my Middle Eastern Kiwi friends who fled different countries from all of that to find peace and security in Christ-Church" he said

John Stringer –a candidate to be the first Councillor for Papanui– has expressed concerns about a Muslim Brotherhood cell he has uncovered operating in Merivale/Papanui with connections in Timaru agitating for cultural and political change along radicalised Islamic lines.

"Alarm bells were first raised at a meeting involving the Egyptian Ambassador to NZ which was somewhat hijacked by this group" John Stringer said

"I have passed on relevant information to the appropriate authorities and my local MP"

The Al-Noor Mosque in Christchurch has been linked recently to two jihadis.

END 

Reference material 

 recall, 18 March 2019

Father critically injured, son killed in attack

By John Lewis and Vaughan Elder

Dr Mohammad Alayan

The Dunedin early childhood centre owner who was critically injured in the Christchurch terror attack which left his son dead is still fighting for his life in Christchurch Hospital.

Dr Mohammad Alayan, who owns An-Nur Early Childhood Education and Care Centre in South Dunedin, was critically injured in the attack but is now out of ICU.

He was with his son Atta Elayyan, a goalkeeper for the national and Canterbury men's futsal teams in Christchurch, who was shot and killed as he prayed in the Masjid Al Noor Mosque.

Born in Kuwait, Atta Elayyan recently became a father and was a popular member of the Christchurch tech industry. He was a director and shareholder of a company called LWA Solutions.

Dr Alayan is well known in the Dunedin Muslim community for his support of Muslim education.

In 2012, Dr Alayan, of Christchurch, began work to establish an $8 million secondary boarding school for Muslim boys, called the An-Nur Kiwi Academy (AKA), in South Dunedin.

It aimed to educate about 100 year 11-13 boys from across the country at the former St Patrick's Primary School in Melbourne St.

It was supposed to open in 2014, but the plans were shelved in 2016 because the Al-Noor Charitable Trust struggled to gain support and funding for the facility.

At the time, Dr Alayan said the project was "a great plan'', but "it requires multi-million dollars for establishing the school facility, and funding has been very difficult in the last three years to secure''.

In light of the situation, the trust then considered using the premises to establish a Muslim co-educational primary school for the Dunedin community.

The arrival of Syrian refugees to the city had prompted the idea, he said.

Atta Elayyan was shot and killed as he prayed in the Masjid Al Noor Mosque.

Dr 

Alayan previously said the trust wanted to establish Muslim education in Dunedin because it believed Muslim children attending state secular schools in the city were subjected to an educational environment that pressured them to adopt values that contradicted Islamic values, such as the evolution theory, sexual relations outside marriage and drinking alcohol.

The trust aimed to provide high-quality education with an emphasis on Islamic values.

#Christchurch #NewZealand #EggBoyHero

Islamists shedding crocodile tears for Christchurch

"Muslim terrorists" , like "Islamic bomb" is a marketing tool created by Muslim leaders

by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Neerja Bhanot killing: FBI releases new images in 1986 hijacking case

In the early 70s then  Pakistan president Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto told the world but particularly India that he would create the  first "Islamic bomb"; a nuclear device that would rival if not better India's nuclear capabilities. 

He was assisted by Saudi and other Arabs,who have a long history of funding Pakistani nuclear scientists.

In the late 60s and early 70s Libya, working with Malaysia and the Organisation of Islamic Conferences (OIC, now known as thence Organisation of Islamic Cooperation ) provided funding,arms and training to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to assist the MILF conquer Southern Philippines. 


The 1970s also a series of plane hijackings, often perpetrated by men and women who were not afraid to advertise their Islamic faith.  Israel was not the only target; so was India.The case of World Airways  Flight 73 is but one example.

India has of course been the subject of a number of recent jihadi attacks. 
As the former head of Pakistan's Inter Services Intelligence put it:
"These jihadi groups and Jihad is the guarantor of our peaceful existence. These are the insurance policy of our peaceful existence."
(See reference material below)


"Muslim terrorists" , like he t "Islamic  bomb" are inventions of Muslim leaders who seem to have decided  that they were never going to win a conventional war and would have to rely on physiological warfare, using guerilla units either in or near Western or non-Muslim targets to create fear,and then an environment conducive to negotiations on terms favorable to them.
The examples are many,and the aftermath of 9-11 where Western countries could not spend enough to "fight discrimination"  is a good example.
Insisting that everyone now stop using the phrase "Muslim terrorists
" is a bit too late. That genie can only be recaptured by the very 
Muslims leaders who created it. END



References 

Hameed Gul and Pakistan's jihadi "insurance policy".

As reported in The Deccan Herald,15 September 2011:

.....in a conversation in Islamabad many years ago, former ISI chief Maj. Gen. Hamid Gul boasted to this analyst that the ISI had over 300 “sleeper cells” inside India which, he asserted, could be activated at any time. 

(Full article below)

The above should be read together with the following notes I sent previously:

The following is very short excerpt, translated from Urdu , from the Islamist magazine "Takbeer" of  Pakistan. 

Takbeer, 28 august 2002, on page 17; report by Aslam Awan; an interview with Lt GenHameed Gul, former Director-General of the Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI);
"These jihadi groups and Jihad is the guarantor of our peaceful existence. These are the insurance policy of our peaceful existence."

Also see  Gul's delight at the prospect of "jihadis .. (being).. the right arm of the Pakistan army!" -can be viewed at link: 

http://www.sbs.com.au/dateline/story/watch/id/600462/n/The-Terror-Trail  

Published on Deccan Chronicle (http://www.deccanchronicle.com)

---

Cut terror’s Saudi pocket money

Another terrorist incident, this time at Delhi high court, and the same old response — a lot of helter-skelter activity amounting to little. A week after the blast, not a substantive clue has been unearthed by the National Intelligence Agency and Delhi Police whose men in khaki more and more resemble a bunch of bumbling buffoons, who seem to do a better job of extorting money from canoodling couples in parks than protecting the city from terrorists, criminals and assorted bad guys. But the Government of India does not seem overly concerned. According to home minister P. Chidambaram, some 51 ISI-supported terrorist cells in India have been “neutralised” in the last few years. That leaves 250-odd Pakistan ISI-founded cells intact. How’s that? Well, in a conversation in Islamabad many years ago, former ISI chief Maj. Gen. Hamid Gul boasted to this analyst that the ISI had over 300 “sleeper cells” inside India which, he asserted, could be activated at any time. The good mason Chidambaram informs us that a strong anti-terror policy and administrative edifice is built “brick by brick”. At his present rate of construction, it is reasonable to assume that it will take a long time to come up. If domestic political factors inhibit hard policing and monitoring as means of deterring terrorism and pre-empting terrorist attacks within India, a similar hesitation on the part of the leading powers squarely prevents its stifling at the source. The global jihad perpetrated by Sunni Muslim terrorist outfits is sustained financially by billions of dollars funnelled by religious charities mainly in Saudi Arabia and the Gulf. These monies go into founding thousands of madrasas in the Islamic world and the subcontinent. Wracked by poverty and illiteracy, the Saudi-funded madrasas host teens and young adults who are pickled in the harsh Wahhabi values of desert Islam preached therein. It is the fuel driving Al Qaeda, its Pakistan Punjab-based derivatives — the various Lashkars — and the emerging groups of extremist and, ironically, educated Muslims in India surreptitiously joining banned groups, such as the Students’ Islamic Movement of India and their spin-offs, like Indian Mujahideen. Starve the terrorist groups of monies and extremism will dry up is a simple enough plan for anti-terrorist action that finds no backers. The Saud family has made it clear that while it does not care for the excesses of Wahhabism to destabilise its fief, it will happily countenance the diversion of this fundamentalist ideology away from its own kingdom and towards distant lands by transfer of funds routed through Islamic charities. The US, which trumpets its global war against terrorism, is aware of the Saudi and Gulf funds propelling the spread of intolerant Wahhabi Islam in Pakistan and generally the subcontinent, but has not rid Arabia of its current rulers, an option Washington has exercised against regimes elsewhere in the region for offering far less provocation. The reason, of course, is the pliability of the Sauds. It is better, the US believes, to have these self-proclaimed “guardians of Mecca and Medina” and habitues of Monte Carlo in the saddle whom Washington can play the puppet master to, than replace them with an unknown colonel and end up with a Gaddafi who, eventually, has to be brought down. This has put US in the uncomfortable position of hurrahing along the democratic-minded Jasmine Revolution in Tunisia, the Tahrir Square movement in Egypt, the rebellion against the long-ruling Assad family in Syria while doing an about-turn when the Shia majority in Bahrain, demanding freedom, turned on the minority Sunni-ruling clique of King Hamad. The American fear was that encouraging the democratic impulses in Bahrain would incline the Shias inhabiting the rich, oil-bearing portions of that country to throw the Sauds out, thereby creating a swath of Shia states in West Asia controlling the oil and looking to Tehran for religious and political guidance and support. But if Riyadh is unwilling to shut off the Wahhabist funding channel for reasons of survival, and the US government is unable to put the kibosh on the Sauds for reasons of politico-strategic expediency, shouldn’t Delhi, even if belatedly and at a minimum, take some basic preventive measures rather than incessantly plead with US to prevail on Islamabad to cease and desist from exporting and facilitating terrorism in India? After all, it is over two decades now since ISI-prompted terrorism raised its head in the wake of the 1989 elections in Jammu and Kashmir. The Indian government should, by now, have emplaced laws, rules and regulations requiring close monitoring of the inward flowing funds from Saudi and Gulf religious charities, audited accounts and explanation of expenditure of these funds from the Indian beneficiary institutions, and carried out official vetting of teachers and syllabi in the madrasas run on these monies. The absence of such a preventive legal-administrative system does not denote a secular state, merely a confused one. As a result a previously communally peaceful Kerala is now a hotbed of Islamic radicalism. Where Kerala is today, India may be tomorrow. Bharat Karnad is a professor at the Centre for Policy Research, New Delhi

---

Source URL: http://www.deccanchronicle.com/editorial/dc-comment/cut-terror%E2%80%99s-saudi-pocket-money-845

Islamic Womens' Council NZ blame Ardern, predecessors for Christchurch massacre: Is it time Winston Peters replaced Ardern as PM?

by Ganesh Sahathevan

                                            Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters, Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern and                                                                               Green Party leader James Shaw showed a unified front. Its is perhaps time Peters

                                           replaced Ardern.




First see this by this writer:
PM Jacinda Ardern is to blame for the Christchurch massacre: Pontificating to the world, she failed to secure the safety of her own citizens

And now from Anjum Rahman,spokesperson at Islamic Women's Council of New Zealand

Time and again, the media have asked me whether or not I was surprised that this attack happened in our country. I will explain to you why I was not surprised. I will try to convey to you my absolute blinding rage.

The Islamic Women's Council of New Zealand (IWCNZ) was formed in 1989, and Muslim women have connected and gathered throughout the country ever since. Our leadership team has a good idea of what our women are going through and the issues in our daily lives. We know the impacts of mainstream discourses arising from wars and terrorist attacks overseas, and from events such as the publishing of ugly cartoons.

In recent times, we became concerned about the increasing pressure on our communities from rising levels of discrimination in this country, and the social issues that came with that. The issues we were seeing were too much for our community to resolve on a volunteer basis. More than this, the solutions were systemic and required investment by government in programmes and human resources.

So about five years ago, we wrote a comprehensive report of the problems we were facing and sent it to the Ministry of Social Development. We pushed, but as far as we know, nothing concrete was done with that report.

After our community was pushed into the spotlight with the "Jihadi brides" comments of our then Prime Minister, we continually requested engagement with government. The result of those very public requests was a visit by a government minister. We had a very frank and open discussion about our needs. We engaged with this minister more than once.

In October 2016, we met with the SIS (New Zealand Security Intelligence Service) at their request and again laid out the problems we were facing as a community and the help we needed.

We had been in constant contact with then-Race Relations Commissioner Dame Susan Devoy and in December 2016 she convened a meeting with Muslim women, where we brought together everything we had been telling her over the year. She committed to using all her influence to help us and was an absolute champion for us. She has shown amazing courage in challenging the public service.

In January 2017, we met with the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet and laid out our concerns. In March 2017, the Human Rights Commission and the State Services Commission organised a ful- day meeting with heads of government. Various Muslim organisations presented to these very senior public servants.

At that meeting, IWCNZ put forward the major problem we were facing and the impacts of discrimination on our community; what we needed from government and what we could offer in support from our community. We explained that the solutions we were suggesting would benefit all minority communities and New Zealand as a whole.

Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern comforts a woman at the Kilbirnie mosque in Wellington today. Photo: RNZ/Ana Tovey

At that meeting, we were absolutely clear about the urgency of this. We were absolutely clear about how exhausted and close to breaking the Muslim women's leadership team were. We told them about our concerns over the rise of vitriol and the rise of the alt-right in New Zealand.

We asked them what resources were being put in to monitoring alt-right groups, something we had also asked the SIS.

I can't even explain the tension and stress we went through going into that meeting. From the government side, there were arguments about who would attend that meeting. This meeting should have been focused on our community and its needs, but the Office of Ethnic Communities (OEC) chose to make it about themselves. The then acting director resigned on the morning of the meeting and they sent no representative to hear us out.

The two of us who presented, Aliya Danzeisen and myself, had very strong concerns for our personal safety - in an emotional and reputational sense. And those fears came to fruition during the year as we were attacked in various ways and our community was divided by the actions of some public servants.

In August 2017, we met the Department of Internal Affairs in Hamilton. Again, we explained how urgent this was, how exhausted we were, what action was needed from government. We engaged with the Department of Internal Affairs and Office of Ethnic Communities over the next few months, pushing as hard as we could for what we needed, but it wasn't forthcoming. We asked for action at a national level but kept being told that any programmes would be in Waikato only.

After months of frustration, Aliya wrote to the State Services Commissioner demanding action be taken. With the support of the Race Relations Commissioner, we met with SSC In January 2018. At that time, we also met with DIA, OEC and two government ministers from the new government. Again, we talked about the effects of discrimination, the issues in our communities, the rise of the alt-right and the increasing level of vitriol we were seeing online and in person. It was the same material, and we kept repeating it.

We have received no significant funding.

After all this work, what we got was an agreement from DIA to fund a government advisory group, but they did not fund our time. Even though they knew we were still exhausted to breaking point, with the added burden of spending hours and days pushing government to act, we were expected to continue on a volunteer basis.

We had to push for funding for a report writer, and I can't say at this time where our report is at.

So here we are.

At least five years of solid government engagement across a National-led and then a Labour-led government. We begged and pleaded, we demanded. We knocked on every door we could, we spoke at every forum we were invited to.

At a major security conference in February 2018, Aliya challenged the sector: if you can spend so much on surveilling our community, why can you not spend on preventative programmes?

Yesterday, the chair of the Islamic Women's Council, Dr Maysoon Salamah, lost her son after hours of surgery. He was shot twice. Her husband was shot in the lower head and has had two surgeries. Her first words to Aliya Danzeisen were "They took my heart".

This is how a heart breaks. This is how our world is torn apart.

I would ask you to picture this: what if the shooting had been a Muslim perpetrator, and it was 50 non-Muslim New Zealanders who had been shot? Would our community be receiving the same level of support that we have today?

Imagine what the media commentary would have been like. We would not have been able to leave our homes, the level of retaliatory attacks on our community would have been swift and immediate, and the police would have struggled to provide any meaningful protection.

That was the fear that we, the leadership of the Muslim community, carried in our hearts every day. That was a major reason why we put so much time and energy into begging government to help us. Attack on our community was the second reason.

No, New Zealand media, we are not surprised. Why would we be?

I will leave you all with this: I want, I need accountability. My community wants and needs accountability. I need those public servants to sit in front of all of us who presented to them in March 2017 and tell us what they have done since. Tell us what resources and programmes you put in place. I want the politicians from both parties that we personally spoke to, to sit in front of us and tell us what they did as a result of our meetings with them.

We need answers.

* Anjum Rahman is spokesperson at Islamic Women's Council of New Zealand

PM Jacinda Ardern is to blame for the Christchurch massacre: Pontificating to the world, she failed to secure the safety of her own citizens

by Ganesh Sahathevvan

New Zealand's Jacinda Ardern was too busy lecturing Trump, Scott Morrison and the world  at large to care about securing her own country.


Her naive speech suggests that she still cannot   appreciate that when you have different cultures forced to live side by side , there will be conflict; and you will need a reinforced security and intelligence apparatus. 

Malaysia,Singapore are examples of countries that had,courtesy of the British ,multiculturalism forced upon them,and had to take the hard steps necessary to maintain peace between the races and cultures.

Singapore has even had to import a Gurkha Contingent as a deterrent;the Gurkhas are employed for their ability to execute orders without  question,and without being  troubled by communal loyalties.

END 

Reference

PM Lee: SPF outsources its work to the Nepalese

Despite having her very own trained Singaporean army for about 52 years, some of the domestic security work in Singapore are still being taken over by Nepalese Troops. Here’s why.

The recent deaths of servicemen have very much garnered nationwide attention as many questioned the safety precautions of trainings by the Singapore Armed Forces. (SAF) This is further fueled by the death of a 33 year old serviceman a few days ago, as well as the death of the actor Aloysius Pang, which had aroused a major wave of unhealthy skepticism and criticisms regarding the safety measures put in place.

In response,PM Lee has assured that he and the SAF leadership do take “safety with utmost seriousness” in a Facebook post on 15th of February.He even mentioned the importance of seeing “things in perspective when something goes wrong”.

He also added that Singaporeans “cannot outsource our security and defence to anyone else” as “we have to defend Singapore ourselves”.

Despite PM Lee stressing the importance of self-defence, which is heavily maintained by the SAF and Singapore Police force(SPF), why does Singapore still outsource some of her domestic security work to Nepalese troops, who are currently upholding peace and security in Singapore?

The GC, or Gurkha Contingent is a department of the SPF and it primarily consists of Gurkhas from Nepal. Gurkhas are Nepalese troops who used to serve under the British Army during the colonial period. These Gurkhas are well-trained, highly disciplined and very dedicated when performing their tasks. The principal role of the contingent is to be a special guard force, and it is currently used to counter terrorist forces.

These Gurkhas were critical during the 50s and 60s due to their crucial role in maintaining the peace and security during these stormy periods, which were marked by the Maria Hertogh Riots, Hock Lee Bus Riots, 1964 Racial Riots and Konfrontasi.Additionally, the late Mr Lee Kuan Yew also highly valued these Gurkhas as he expressed tremendous trust for them in his memoir ‘From Third World To The First’.

It seemed that such trust did not dwindle and continue to be projected by the government today as they continue to outsource Singapore’s security to Nepalese troops, instead of using self-trained Singaporean servicemen and regulars 100% for the job.

To such an admission, netizens do not take it kindly as many were antagonistic, actively expressing hostile statements on Facebook.

Malaysia's Minister For Finance appoints KPMG partner as "Special Officer",despite KPMG's contribution to 1MDB's losses

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Kok Seng is the Partner-in-Charge for KPMG Northern Region.  He has extensive audit, accounting and consulting experience both in Malaysia and Washington, D.C., USA. His experience is not limited to audit assignments but also covers the various corporate exercises which include corporate advisory on initial public offerings, cross border acquisitions, special issues and share valuation. He currently sits in the Penang State Shared Services and Outsourcing and Creative Multimedia Content Council.
(see http://aamc2015.usm.my/index.php/2-uncategorised

KPMG's _proudly boast on their website:

Special officer to the finance minister, Dato’ Ooi Kok Seng, who was also present, had mentioned that the government had not yet received the funds from a one-off special dividend from Petroliam Nasional Bhd (Petronas) of RM30 billion which will be used for tax refunds announced during Budget 2019. “At the moment the funds are not in as it is only a few days past the new year. However, [the public] should not worry as the finance minister has given the assurance that full refunds will be made through the special dividend,” he said.

Dato’ Ooi Kok Seng is KPMG Head (North).He seems to have won the favour of the Penang Government and the DAP, despite KPMG's 1MDB history.This excerpt from the DAP website is indicative of their relationship:

The Penang state government has chosen the internationally renowned accounting firm, KPMG and its senior partner Chartered Accountant Ooi Kok Seng, for the verification exercise and to formulate the template and presented to the public. As an independent audit firm, KPMG is required to uphold the highest standards of professional standards ensuring that it complies with the principles of objectivity, independence and no conflict of interest before undertaking any task.


KPMG's contribution to 1MDB's losses has been well documented by this writer and by Sawarak Report (see stories below).

This conflict adds to that concerning PwC, Goldman Sach's auditor for some 37 years, who have nevertheless been appointed to oversee 1MDB.

END

Don't Ask Us! - KPMG Global's Astonishing Response on 1MDB

• 24 March 2015
 
• 15

1MDB is not anything to do with us – Global Chief of KPMG, John Veihmeyer

For weeks the mantra of the chairman of 1MDB’s governing Advisory Board (Malaysia’s Prime Minister) has been that the management of the fund has been ‘cleared’, because the accounts were ‘forensically’ audited by international accountancy firms of global standing.

The firms who have given 1MDB clean bills of health have been the Malaysia branches of the accountancy giants Deloitte and KPMG.

Malaysia’s top team at KPMG – no accountability to HQ?

However, last week Sarawak Report demonstrated evidence pointing to a series of sharp practices on the part of KPMG during the audit process for the year ending March 2010.

These enabled 1MDB to conceal the loss of USD$700 million, which was the sum siphoned out of its joint venture with the little known oil company PetroSaudi.

Following this expose, the Sydney-based Malaysian investigative financial journalist, Ganesh Sahathevan, directly challenged the Global Chairman of the company, John Veihmeyer, to give his response to the allegations.

Sahathevan asked whether KPMG Global had been aware of any of the transactions relating to 1MDB outlined in the expose?  He added that:

“much of what has been reported was in the public domain since at least 2014, and hence there is also the question of why the Global Board took no action despite that fact?”

KPMG’s international image – a massive global firm

The rapid response Sahathevan received from KPMG merits reading in full, because it puts paid to any assumptions that a local branch of this ‘global network’ of accountancy firms can be relied upon to maintain any sort of acceptable standard laid down by a central authority.

The General Counsel (top lawyer) for Mr Veihmeyer states that the corporate headquarters has no involvement in the matter, because the KPMG network represents nothing more than a ‘Swiss Cooperative’ of happy Helvetic brand sharers.

In short, he explains, no one at HQ is responsible for what their fellow franchise holders get up to. They are just there to help and advise when required.

Dear Mr Sahathevan

I refer to your email below addressed to Mr John Veihmeyer, Global Chairman, KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International).

I am the General Counsel of KPMG International and am responding on behalf of Mr Veihmeyer.

KPMG International is a Swiss Cooperative. Member firms of the KPMG network of independent firms are affiliated with KPMG International. KPMG International provides no client services. No member firm has any authority to obligate or bind KPMG International or any other member firm vis-à-vis third parties, nor does KPMG International have any such authority to bind or obligate any member firm.

KPMG International does not have any relationship with, or connection to, 1MDB”.

Yours faithfully

Tom Wethered

Malaysians and others, who had assumed that accreditation by KPMG represented some form of guarantee of high standards; quality control; centralised monitoring and disciplinary process to ensure high standards of accountancy practice must therefore stand disappointed.

According to KPMG’s top legal eagle, theirs is a form of franchise that has its cake and eats it at the same time.

Name bearers get to carry the brand, but without any form of accountability whatsoever:

“nor does KPMG International have any such authority to bind or obligate any member firm” [Tom Wethered]

Franchise without accountability?

If a Malaysian were to find dog meat in his McDonald’s burger in KL, he would expect to receive some response from the company HQ from under its golden arches in California – and doubtless he would.

By contrast, if KPMG Malaysia assists in the cover-up of a billion dollar heist of public money, it turns out that their global HQ in Amsterdam merely refers you to the cantons of Switzerland and their company’s new corporate structure, which is accountability free.

Having their cake and eating it 

Mr Wethered’s response that “KPMG International does not have any relationship with, or connection to, 1MDB”  represents a stark contrast, however, with the firm’s own publicity material.

The KPMG website and numerous articles make reference instead to the guarantee of quality that their brand lends to its affiliates across the world.

KPMG’s own website, under the banner line “Acting With Integrity”, declares:

“KPMG is a global network of professional firms providing Audit, Tax and Advisory services. We have more than 155,000 outstanding professionals working together to deliver value in 155 countries worldwide.”

On the other hand, scrutiny of this KPMG website soon makes plain that behind the fine words and sentiments there is indeed what appears to be a significant dearth of actual governance in this corporate structure:

ABOVE ALL, WE ACT WITH INTEGRITY

We are constantly striving to uphold the highest professional standards, provide sound advice and rigorously maintain our independence….

The KPMG Global website concedes that its Head Officers provide policies, even regulations. But, there is no mention of enforcement.

The Global Board is the principal governance and oversight body. The key responsibilities of the Board include approving long-term strategy, protecting and enhancing the KPMG brand, and approving policies and regulations

There is no single line of accountability within the organisation.

Leadership

Internationally, the affairs of KPMG are the responsibility of several bodies.

Aspirations, but can they be enforced?

The controls that would lead the third party readers of its audit reports to feel comforted that quality control is enforced, appear to be missing, as indicated by the letter sent by KMPG’s top counsel.

Although there is a deluge of information about the values and quality that this network of affiliated firms is “striving to achieve”, there seems to be a lack of clear accountability within the structure of the organisation.

Without accountability and enforcement structures the high values and claims of integrity that pack out KPMG’s corporate messaging are surely effectively meaningless?

What better example than this latest abdication of responsibility over the scandal of 1MDB?

KPMG’s Positive PR

The legal counsel of KPMG seems therefore to be entirely correct in his statement that the global headquarters can wash its hands entirely of this little fracas over in Malaysia.

Star Interview with former Global Head Michael Andrew presented a very different state of affairs.

Yet, as Mr Sahathevan and others suggest, this is not the public face of the company.

Certainly, the ‘Swiss Cooperative’s’ corporate PR does not accurately represent this state of affairs and basic lack of governance.

Take for example the recent ‘Up Close And Personal’ article by Malaysia’s Star Newspaper about the role of the recently retired Global Chairman of KPMG.

In his interview Mr Andrew told the Star that clients in KL had the right to expect the same level of service as in Europe.

He also said that the company upheld its “duty to the broader community”:

KPMG’s brand, Andrew says, is all about being independent and objective because the firm and its employees has a public interest of responsibility to the broader community.

“We have to ensure that we uphold the governance standards in every country for our multi-national clients. They expect the same standards in Kuala Lumpur as they do in Johannesburg, Frankfurt or New York,” he says.

He adds that corporate governance defines the KPMG brand. “If we don’t meet the governance standards, then people won’t have confidence in our business. Integrity is at the heart of everything we do.

“This is ensuring that we understand that our duty is to the broader community than just to any particular client or particular transaction. Because if we do some work, which turns out to be incorrect, it’ll affect our global brand,” he says.

Every three months, KPMG employees are required to sign a declaration to maintain their independence around their audit clients. [The Star Online 10th Aug 2013]

However, despite that commitment to the broader community, in the case of 1MDB the public was never informed about the siphoning of $700 million in public funds out of the fund, thanks to KPMG Malaysia’s accountancy practices.

And now it turns out that KPMG Global regards itself as having no responsibility at all in the matter.

Were it to be more widely recognised that KPMG Global exerts so little quality control over its branches, the reputation on which this ‘cooperative’ relies might very well lose a lot of its lustre.