Najib's admission of million dollar gift for a "queen" purchased in part while golfing with Obama throws new light on apparently missing gift to Michellle

by Ganesh Sahathevan


My selfie with President Obama !



As reported by the Malay Mail:

Datuk Seri Najib Razak today said a 2014 bill worth around half a million ringgit at luxury brand Chanel’s store in Honolulu, Hawaii was during his trip to play golf with then US president Barack Obama.


Najib took to his Facebook account again to explain himself over big expenses allegedly linked to him, just a day or two after his Monday night claim that the 2014 bill of over RM3.3 million in one day using his credit cards was for an unnamed foreign “royalty” at a Swiss luxury jeweller’s store.

Najib’s Facebook post comes after a witness in his ongoing corruption trial confirmed on Monday that Najib’s two credit cards at AmBank were used for 10 separate transactions totalling €763,500 or over RM3.3 million at Swiss jeweller De Grisogono’s store in Italy in August 2014, as well as for US$130,625 on December 22, 2014 at Chanel in Honolulu (equivalent to RM466,330.11 at that time) and RM127,017.46 on January 4, 2015 at Shangri-la Hotel in Bangkok.

The WSJ’s 2016 report which Najib referred to had also mentioned a €750,000 purchase in August 2014 at an Italian branch of De Grisogono using Najib’s credit card.

In the same Facebook post today, Najib reiterated that he had in his Facebook post on Monday already explained the RM3.3m purchase, but this time offered a further clue on the identity of the alleged “royalty” from an unnamed country that received the purported gift.

“The queen of that country’s royalty wrote to my wife as the jewellery was for her and her entourage.


“The name of the recipient and which country will be disclosed in court soon,” he said without offering further details.

It is unclear when the promised unveiling of the purported receiver of the gift worth RM3.3 million would be disclosed in court, or whether the upcoming prosecution witnesses in Najib’s trial would be testifying or questioned on the matter.

The above is to be read with the post below from 2017.Obviously all parties need to provide further explanation.


See also

Why did Obama meet Riza Aziz, and why did the CIA not advise against that meeting, or did it?

realpolitikasia

Monday, September 4, 2017

Gift Of Million Dollar Watch From Malaysia Said To Be Missing From US State Department Register Of Gifts

by Ganesh Sahathevan





BVLGARI DIVA-Expensive, but not as expensive as the
custom made model believed to have been excluded from the records

A custom designed Bvlgari watch worth approximately USD 1 Million , said to have been presented as  a gift to a First Lady of the United States from the government and people of  Malaysia,appears  to be missing from the US State Department's register of gifts from foreign sources.

The only gift  from recent times that appears in that register is this:
Mrs. Michelle Obama, First Lady of the United States. Black silk dress with pink and white pattern. Gray-black dress with white and beige pattern and gemstones. Black kaftan with colorful sequins. Pink-red
songket fabric. Rec’d—4/27/2014. 
 Presented by Datin Seri Hajah Rosmah binti Mansor, First Lady of Malaysia.

END 

References 

Department of StateOffice of the Chief of Protocol; Gifts to Federal Employees From ForeignGovernment Sources Reported to Employing Agencies in Calendar Year2014; Notice

a.

t

Legal Profession Admission Board Annual Report 2015-16 deficiency : Is the Member for Cronulla, the AG NSW, a victim of regulatory capture by NSW Liberal donor Top Group?

by Ganesh Sahathevan



On 17 May 2016 the SMH reported:

The ad for the $2800 PwC - Top education internship on WeChat.CREDIT:TOP EDUCATION

Top Education Institute, headquartered in the University of Sydney's biomedical sciences building in Sydney's inner west, circulated advertisements targeting Chinese international students on social media app WeChat last week, spruiking the opportunity to "work closely with PwC partners" in a program with a "1 per cent admission rate in Australia".

Top Education staff told prospective applicants the "internship" program would cost $2800, sparking anger from students concerned that the world's largest professional services firm was selling work placements to the highest bidder, rather than based on merit.

But the advertisements misrepresented what was actually a two-week training course, the companies now say.

Top Education's assistant principal of external engagement, Susan Cao, said PwC had approached Top Education to start a partnership.

"PwC provided the opportunity to us, we are providing the opportunity for our students," she said


"We don't want the journalist to report this," she said. "We already take off the advertisement, we want to change the words.



The advertisements reveal that for the more than $2000 price tag, students would have the opportunity to be exclusively placed for 10 days in PwC's Sydney offices, the Australian hub of the global company that turned over $35 billion in revenue last year.




The incident above should have triggered a regulatory response from the NSW Legal Profession Admission Board (LPAB) which supervises the activities of colleges granted licenses to issue LLB degrees which can qualify holders for admission to practise in NSW. Together with that licence comes special powers under the Uniform Admission Rules to issue what are in effect certificates of good conduct which the LPAB relies on to determine if applicants for admission to practise are fit and proper.

However the LPAB's 2015-2016 Annual Report does not disclose if and whether Top Group was subject of any sanction or investigation; neither does it disclose the reasons why there was not any sanction or investigation, despite the matter being reported widely. As shown above, the matter remains in the public domain.

The Attorney General NSW ,who is also the Member for Cronulla is responsible for tabling the LPAB Annual Reports in Parliament. While he does not sign-off on the accounts he does have a duty to ensure that the documents he tables are do not mislead Parliament. It is hard to imagine that he was not aware of the Top Group internship scandal, and its exclusion from the LPAB Annual Report.

As reported previously the Member for Cronulla, The AG's NSW Liberal Party received donations of $44,275 from TOP Education Group just before after TOP was granted the "first & only" license issued a private company to award law degrees.

It does appear as if the Member for Cronulla, The AG NSW, is a victim of regulatory capture. Consequently his LPAB and Department of Justice NSW annual reports need reviewing and amendment.

It as previously been shown by this writer that the  Legal Profession Admission Board Annual Report 2015-16 can be shown to be incomplete and deficient by comparison with  publicly available documents,   including documents of the Australian Academy Of Law.

The LPAB and the AG have yet to indicate what action they might be taking to address the issues raised above, and elsewhere by this writer. They maintain that being victims of threats and intimidation by this writer, there is no need to address any of the issues raised.

END

See also

AG NSW justifies exclusion of foreign regulatory risks from Dept of Justice annual reports on the basis that he was threatened, intimidated by the information:The matter of Top Group has implications for all regulators (including the NSW Law Soc)

Transfers of GST revenue to the Consolidated Fund cannot be theft or a breach of trust; GST refunds are not guaranteed

by Ganesh Sahathevan

Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak is pictured at the Kuala Lumpur High Court July 15, 2019. — Picture by Firdaus Latif

While it is true that the administration of any Goods and Services Tax system is complex, in simple terms, the tax is revenue to the government concerned, and traders registered for GST purposes are in effect collection agents for the government. Whether they receive a GST refund is dependent on whether their input taxes( i.e. the GST they pay) exceeds their output taxes (i.e. GST they collect).

This statement on the GST Consolidated fund reported by the Malay Mail does not reflect that simple fact:



Attorney General Tommy Thomas said channelling good and service tax (GST) revenue directly into federal government’s consolidated revenue account was wrong.

In his correspondence to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) last October, Thomas pointed out that this was a breach of fundamental trust law principles and trust accounting requirement as it violates the Section 7 of the Financial Procedure Act 1957 and Section 54 of the GST Act 2014, Malaysiakini reported today.

“The GST regime is based on the fundamental precept that taxpayers will receive a refund for the amount of GST they pay in the course of producing taxable supplies.

“Parliament’s intention is that taxpayers receive this refund. The statutory entitlement to a refund and the creation of the GST Trust Fund are evidence of that intention,” he said.

“By failing to ensure that taxpayers received their refunds, the former government failed to give effect to Parliament’s intention,” Thomas added.

Thomas’ reply was appended to the PAC’s report on the delayed RM19.4 billion in GST refunds released today.

The PAC concluded that no GST fund was lost, but stated that GST Trust Fund was insufficiently funded because it was used for other purposes.

The PAC is right in that the GST Trust Fund is akin to a bank or insurance company where there is an obligation to meet depositors or policyholders demands.However that indeterminate demand does not prevent the bank or insurance company from investing the money held in their accounts. 

The duty to ensure Tiley payments to depositors, policyholders, and in the case of those registered for GST purposes is a matter separate from the right of the recipient of those funds, in this case the Government of Malaysia, to utilise those funds for its legislated purposes.

Clearly, channelling the GST revenue  into the Consolidated Fund is well within the legislated purposes.

END 

Replacement of long time LPAB employee Louise Pritchard with Tan Siew Ting McKeogh adds to questions about Zhu Minshen's dealings with the NSW Liberals & minister in charge of the LPAB, AG Mark Speakman

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

L'Affaire Adelaide : DOD can justify the DCNS submarine contracts by making full public disclosure of the related offset contracts

by Ganesh Sahathevan





Mr Pyne and the boss of DCNS, Herve Guillou, visit the 
shipyards in Cherbourg. Is l'affaire Adelaide a repeat of DCNS's l'affaire Karachi
-Australian taxpayers have not been told why French subs will cost 5 times more



Robert Gottliebsen in The Australian this morning:



Australia’s defence outlook is changing rapidly and new Defence Minister Linda Reynolds faces a daunting task.

She is being bombarded with material from defence officials defending what are increasingly obvious past mistakes or strategies in danger of becoming obsolete.

The submarine contract and the joint strike fighter (JSF) are at the top of the list with yet another defence expert warning over the weekend that technology change is endangering the $90 billion French submarine gamble.


The ABC reports that former government defence adviser Derek Woolner and fellow researcher David Glynne Jones say that Australia’s objective to produce a “regionally superior” submarine is “now under challenge” and by the time the new submarine hits the water around 2034 “it’s going to be obsolete”.

Woolner says our submarine is to be built with a heavy metal main battery, as part of a process already initiated under a contract signed by France’s Naval Group company and MTU Friedrichshafen for diesel generator sets.


Hydraulics expert Aidan Morrison’s detailed research paper last year showed that the while the pump-jet system works well with nuclear submarines, at the slow pace required for diesel electric it fails.

After a long delay, defence countered by claiming that pump-jets could be efficient across the entire speed range. Morrison responded: “It is a bizarre, irrational claim with no basis whatsoever in physics. It is frankly bewildering that such a claim could be made, given how easily its falsehood can be established by even moderate research, or simple logic.”

To pretend that the Australian DCNS contracts are nothing like the other DCNS contracts is to indulge in that naive Australian habit of pretending that this country alone is pure and incorruptible.

The reports below show that even documents in the public domain show that belief to be fantasy.

If the Department Of Defence wants to justify its DCNS-Barracuda decision, it can start by providing full public disclosure of all the related offset contracts, providing details of when, who and how much.

END 

See first 

Is l'affaire Adelaide a repeat of DCNS's l'affaire Karachi-Australian taxpayers have not been told why French subs will cost 5 times more

And then: 

Christopher Pyne called out for taking defence job within 18 months of leaving Parliamenth

And for the EY connection

https://www.naval-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/rapport-financier-2017-en-1.pdf - 

https://www.naval-group.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/dcns-rapport-financier-2016-en.pdf  

Erdogan' to visit Australia next year-What insights might Gov Beazley ,her Premier & AG provide Erdogan with regards his enemy Gulen?

by Ganesh Sahathevan

A man holds a placard reading in "Take your hands off Turkish democracy" with the portrait of Fethullah Gulen in Istanbul, Turkey. Source: Getty Images

SBS has reported today that Turkey's President Erdogan will visit Australia next year. In 2016 SBS reported how Erdogan's sworn enemy, Mohamad Fetullah Gulen and his Gulen movement enjoy access to the highest levels of government in NSW.


The 2016 story also reported that Turkey’s then ambassador to Australia Ahmet Vakur Gökdenizler had warned federal and state authorities that local Gulenists were part of the international network that had attempted to overthrow the Erdogan government in the 2016 coup,which had the backing of some parts of Turkey's armed forces.


None of this seemed to have deterred the NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian and various members of the judiciary, including the Chief Justice Tom Bathurst and the then President of the Court of Appeal, Margaret Beazley from lending their support to various Gulen organised events.Beazley was appointed Governor of NSW in May this year.

The NSW Supreme Court website includes a speech by Beazley at a Gulen movement event,where she argues that sharia and the common law are not incompatible. Gulen is a proponent of political Islam, and hence the public support of a President of the Court Of Appeal, placed on the Supreme Court website, is quite an achievement.


Erdogan has declared the Gulen movement a terrorist organisation;in Turkey the movement is officially known as the Fetullah Gulen Terrorist Organisation (FETO). When in Australia however he might find that his hosts in NSW might want to re-educate him with regards FETO. They seem to have insights into the activities and motives of the Gulen movement which have escaped Erdogan, his advisers,and others who have researched the movement over the past two decades.

END 

See also

Gulen, Governor Beazley, the Premier and AG NSW and members of the judiciary : Revelation of Gulen's financing raises perception of bias that must be addressed.