Wednesday, September 7, 2022

Former Australian chief justice who found that Najib was right to block websites that reported 1MDB theft, who reinterpreted facts of a decision of his own court to favour Vincent Tan, will be keynote speaker at LAWASIA ADR conference

by Ganeash Sahathevan  





Thomas Bathurst, the  former Australian chief justice who found that Najib was right to block websites that reported the 1MDB theft while Najib was still in power, and who reinterpreted the  facts of a decision of his own court  to favour Vincent Tan, will be the keynote speaker at  LAWASIA's  ADR conference in Fiji. 


The choice of Bathurst as keynote speaker is one more reason why, as previously reported, LAWASIA needs Asian leadership and a HQ in Singapore if it is to remain relevant Its Australian leadership has shown once again that it is more interested in  promoting parochial interests, rather than those of legal professionals in the region. 


TO BE READ WITH 


Wednesday, December 18, 2019

When senior Australian judges decide that Najib Razak's blocking of websites reporting the1MDB theft was due to "defamatory" publications ,Australia has a problem: Will Australia do like Malaysia did 20 years ago to address the problem?

by Ganesh Sahathevan


The 1MDB scandal has been described as the worse case of kleptocracy the world has ever seen by none other than the former US Attorney General Jeff Sessions.

The theft would probably never have come to light had it not been for the work of journalists, and in particular Clare Rewcastle-Brown of the UK. It is just as well that Rewcastle-Brown was publishing out of the UK and not Australia for had she been based in Australia  her work would have been readily halted by an Australian judge, had the perpetrators chosen to sue for defamation in Australia. 

There seems to have developed over the past two decades since the landmark decision in Carlovers & Ors v Sahathevan (in which this writer was the defendant) a desire among members of the Australian judiciary to punish journalists, or worse silence them.

Deborah Snow of the SMH reports that Richard Ackland, editor of the Gazette of Law and Journalism, goes so far as to suggest that Australian courts have developed a “tribal hostility to journalists”.

Ackland's observation was witnessed recently by this writer when very senior members of the NSW judicial system, including the Chief Justice Of NSW Tom Bathurst  determined that writer's work on the 1MDB affair had generally defamed many unnamed "eminent persons". 

The judges involved went as far as to approve of the Najib regime's blocking one of this writer's blogs; they claimed the blog had been blocked as a result of this writer's defamatory publications. 

The judges concerned did not provide any reasons for their judgement.In fact they justified their findings by accepting as true an account published on the Internet about this writer being an agent of the present Mahathir government who had been paid USD 1 Million to spread falsehoods about Najib Razak; and that part of that scheme involved bribing reporters from ABC 4 Corners to put to air a false story about Najib's involvement in the 1MDB affair. 

The judges findings were reported by Ben Butler in The Australian early this year, but no one from the judiciary or the Government has provided any explanation for those false findings.

Worse, the judges concerned went so far as to rewrite the facts of the landmark decision in Carlovers & Ors v Sahathevan, which was later applied in Bond v Barry, to further discredit this writer's work, which has spanned some 25 years.

The rewriting and re-interpretation of the Calovers decision is intriguing for one of the plaintiffs was Malaysian businessman Vincent Tan Chee Yioun. Tan has a history of interfering in the affairs of the judiciary in Malaysia . In the Carlovers matter in  2001  the Supreme Court NSW found against him, and ordered him to pay costs. Now it seems the Chief Justice and others have determined that Tan was wronged.


All of the above is distressing to this writer and others who have in the past looked to Australia as a safe haven from which to investigate and write about high level corruption and misdeeds. As the Chinese journalist and academic Louisa Lim puts it:

Then I moved to Australia. To my surprise, writing about China from Melbourne proved no simpler. But there, I was hobbled by different forces, namely Australia’s oppressive and notoriously complex defamation laws.


The problem it seems is not in the laws but in the judges whose job it is to interpret and apply those laws. Malaysia faced a similar problem with its judges more than 20 years ago, caused by among others Vincent Tan Chee Yioun. Fortunately pressure from the people, led by journalists including this writer, led to the removal of a number of rogue judges and lawyers. Australians must not pretend that the same is not needed here.

END




Bizarre blog claims used to deny man right to practise law




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.

READ NEXT



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 (Admission has since been denied, for the same reasons, but without explicit reference to the Thirdforce story).
BUSINESS REPORTER
Business reporter Ben Butler has covered everything from tractors to fashion to corporate collapses. He has previously worked for the Herald Sun and as a senior business reporter with The Age and Sydney Morning... 









Monday, September 5, 2022

The Agong cannot be compelled to even hear , let alone consider Pekan MP Najib Razak's prayer for pardon; the operation of Article 48(4) (c) of the Malaysian Constitution may not have been triggered

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 






Tan Sri Azhar Azizan Harun, Speaker Dewan Rakyat has declared

"In (the matter of Pekan MP and former Prime Minister Najib Razak's conviction), Article 48(4)(c) (of the Malaysian Constitution)  provides that if a pardon petition is filed by the MP concerned within 14 days from the date the appeal is decided, the disqualification of the MP will only take effect once the pardon petition is settled (if the petition is rejected).

"Therefore, considering that the pardon petition was filed under Article 42 on Sept 2 (2022), which is within 14 days from the date of the Federal Court's decision, his disqualification (as MP) will only commence once the pardon petition is settled (in case the petition is rejected).

"This means that his status as Pekan MP has not changed at this time, and will only be finalised when the appeal petition is settled,".......


However Article 42 of the Malaysian Constitution simply  codifies the royal prerogative to grant pardons but does not compel the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to even entertain a petition for pardon. 

Article 42 (1) states: 

 The Yang di-Pertuan Agong has power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all offences which have been tried by court-martial and all offences committed in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur and Labuan; and the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri of a State has power to grant pardons, reprieves and respites in respect of all other offences committed in his State

Consequently The Speaker's  reliance on Article 48 (4)(c) to justify Najob remaining MP for Pekan might be premature for simple mechanics would dictate that a prayer must first be heard to be considered, let alone rejected or granted.

Article  48(4) (c) states:

..if within the period specified in paragraph (a) or the period after the disposal of the appeal or other court proceedings specified in paragraph (b) there is filed a petition for a pardon, such disqualification shall take effect immediately upon the petition being disposed of


In other words, until and unless  The Yang di-Pertuan Agong indicates that he has heard prayer  and that it will be considered, can that petition be said to even exist, in a form and substance that can trigger Article 48(4) (c)?  If the petition does not exist, the fact of it being filed would be irrelevant. This may seem harsh or unjust, but The Yang Di-Pertuan Agong is exercising  a royal prerogative that has been codified in its function but not in its exercise. As mentioned above, there is nothing in The Malaysian Constitution that compels The Agong to even hear a prayer.

In fact, it appears from media reports that The Yang Di Pertuan Agong is of the opinion that it would be against the teachings of Islam for him to hear the prayer.


END 



Sunday, September 4, 2022

In 2017 College Of Law Australia sponsored the Annual General Meeting of one of South East Asia's oldest and best funded society of lawyers, the Malaysia Bar Council- Bar Council has never explained why it needed sponsorship for its AGM

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 




In 2017 College Of Law Australia sponsored the Annual General Meeting of one of South East Asia's oldest and best funded society of lawyers, the Malaysia Bar Council.
No explanation has been provided for this superfluous largesse. https://lnkd.in/gcExkjGZ.


Meanwhile the issues raised here remain unresolved.



Bar Council education ‘JV’ must be clarified

By  , in Scandal on July 19, 2019 . Tagged width:  ,  , 

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.

bar council

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 


Thursday, September 1, 2022

1MDB : Investigation of DWP-Hakkasan-Khadem AlQubaisy connection may lead to web of others, including Thai-Singapore beauty products venture DWP APSU

 by Ganesh Sahathevan 

Further to the earlier investigation with regards money misappropriated from 1MDB and  the  Design Worldwide Partnership -Hakkasan-Khadem AlQubaisy links, it can now be revealed that Design World Partnership, an architectural firm, provided funds that were invested in  a Thai-Singapore beauty products venture DWP APSU 

                                            


The extract above from the Trade Marks Registry, Intellectual Property Department of The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region  shows how DWP APSU Ltd of Hong Kong serves as the address for service of APSU Ancient Rituals Pte Ltd of Singapore, with regards the latter's trade mark registered in Hong Kong. 

Information has been provided this writer that DWP provided funds to DWP APSU so that it may exploit commercially the APSU product range. This information raises the possibility that 1MDB funds were not only invested in large ventures like the Hakkasan nightclubs in the United States, but also smaller ventures in South East Asia, and perhaps, other parts of the world.

TO BE READ WITH 


Thursday, July 14, 2022

Why have 1MDB investigators ignored the Design Worldwide Partnership -Hakkasan-Khadem AlQubaisy connection?

by Ganesh Sahathevan


                           Khadem Al Qubaisy



In September 2021 industry publication Commercial Interior Design reported, under the headline Hakkasan Dubai reopens for 2021 with interiors refreshed by dwp:

After temporarily closing its doors, the award-winning Cantonese restaurant Hakkasan Dubai has reopened with a refreshed interior by Design Worldwide Partnership (dwp).

Global hospitality company Tao Group Hospitality took over the Hakkasan brand in April 2021 and appointed dwp to spearhead a summer-long enhancement programme at the popular’s restaurant’s new home.

Thanks to work done by the investigative news site Sarawak Report the connection between the 1MDB theft and Hakkasan are well known, and have been in the public domain for more than SIX years. 

Sarawak Report has also provided evidence of Khadem AlQubaisy's control and ownership of Hakkasan. That ought to have prompted investigators to search worldwide for companies linked to AlQubaisy. Had they done so they would have discovered Al-Qubaisy's link to DWP. It should not take an expert in international tax to see why that would be relevant, especially in light of the Commercial Interior Design report above.

The Google news search of Sarawakreport and Hakkasan is provided below for the benefit of 1MDB investigators who seem to have missed the connections


TO BE READ WITH 




No comments: