Sunday, July 7, 2019

Another Australian connection to Anwar Ibrahim: Investigation into College of Law Asia Pac reveals an interesting media link to Team Anwar (despite the College’s aversion to media queries)


JULY 7, 2019 EDIT


by Ganesh Sahathevan
image.png
The College Of Law Asia Pac maintains its silence despite the now very many questions about its business in Malaysia. Meanwhile, College Of Law Asia Pac Director Peter Tritt’s Twitter account shows that he follows one
Brian Donald a  Malaysian based Freelance Fixer/Producer Ex NBC News and AlJazeera. 

Donald is the only journalist on Tritt’s list of people followed;and it is equally interesting that he does not follow anyone in Malaysia,or even Singapore.Additionally, he is under orders from his CEO, Neville Carter, to not answer any queries from especially this journalist.
Readers should not that that Donald describes himself as a fixer/producer. A fixer is one who has extensive local networks that can be used to arrange matters in the area of interest.  That this fixer chooses to have as his profile a photograph of him shaking hands with the prime minister desperately waiting Anwar Ibrahim implies a relationship that is relevant to his work.
Whether the College Of Law has been using the services of Brian Donald needs to be clarified immediately.
END 

image.png

Brian Donald

@BDonaldKL

Malaysian based Freelance Fixer/Producer Ex NBC News and AlJazeera
Kuala Lumpur
Joined July 2009


See also

Saturday, July 6, 2019

NSW Government public statements raise audit red flags: Rob Stokes reliance on "material accuracy" is not accurate and suggests material exclusions in public accounts

by Ganesh Sahathevan

As reported by Jacob Saulwick of the Sydney Morning Herald:


Planning Minister Rob Stokes and the Greater Sydney Commission are throwing their support behind the organisation’s chief executive, saying they are satisfied with the “material accuracy” of biographical information included in annual report


Mr Stokes’ spokeswoman did not answer questions about what was meant by “material accuracy,” and whether it implied a lower standard of accuracy appropriate for annual reports tabled in parliament.



Materiality with regards information in an annual report has a specific meaning.The concept of materiality is used to determine the inclusion or exclusion of items from an annual report.

Accuracy of course goes to the truth of a given statement.

While what is material and what is accurate can be open to argument, conflating both concepts in a phrase like "material accuracy" suggests an appalling misunderstanding of basic accounting concepts if not a too clever use of language to conceal the lack of accuracy in a material fact.

If the CEO of a public company attempted to explain away a discrepancy by use of weasel words like "material accuracy" the shares in that company would be sold down, and its auditors would be expected to investigate the discrepancy as well as be on the alert for any other matters that the company may be concealing.

The statement by Rob Stokes and his officers is an obvious red flag that NSW Audit should not ignore. As reported previously on this blog (see stories below) even the Attorney General NSW is not averse to excluding inconvenient matters from  annual reports for which he is responsible.
END 







Legal Profession Admission Board Annual Report 2015-16 shown to be incomplete and deficient by publicly available documents,including documents of the Australian Academy Of Law

by Ganesh Sahathevan
Accreditation of PLT providers The LPAB also determines applications from
institutions which offer courses of practical legal training (PLT). Accreditation or
reaccreditation  recognises that successful completion of the course provides the
required competencies for entry-level lawyers set out in Schedule 2 of the Legal Profession Uniform Admission Rules 2015. Similar to its decision in relation to the
reaccreditation of law courses, the LPAB determined that it would reaccredit existing
PLT providers in NSW for a period of 2 years, pending review of the accreditation
framework.

The College Of Law Sydney is the largest issuer of PLT certificates in NSW. It is in essence part of the NSW legal establishment, having been once owned by the NSW Law Society.
Consequently statements by its long standing  CEO and Principal ,Neville Carter, which are  readily available in the public domain,cannot be considered irrelevant to the LPAB’s disclosures in its 2015-16 Annual Report. In the words of Neviile Carter , from a paper presented at an  Australian Academy of Law Conference held between  11-13 August 2017 : 
 Increasingly, there were complaints from students, law firms and other stakeholders addressing a variety of issues best summarised in terms of three main areas of concern; uncertainty, unevenness and unfairness. In April 2014 the Board commissioned a Stakeholder Consultation intended to investigate the basis for these concerns, to provide reliable evidence of perceptions of need and a fact-based evaluation of the key issues. Ultimately, its purpose was to inform recommendations to regulators about priorities for a national review of the PLT sector 
Senior executive staff at the College subsequently participated in more than one hundred consultation meetings involving regulators, firms and other employers, professional associations, students, teachers, courts and government. The volume of qualitative information arising from the process was large. Surprisingly, the main themes which emerged were almost entirely about time, cost, flexibility, clarity and utility of the system. 
   Project leaders had expected that, consistent with history, the dominant concerns of stakeholders would be about “standards” in various dimensions, ultimately sourced in opinions about the relative capabilities of the graduates. However, in a post GFC-world, it was plain that the concerns of the stakeholders of the Australian legal education system were very different, essentially economic and logistical in nature.  
“Utility of the system” is an interesting phrase, given the historic complaints about course content.As re-published on the Realpolitikasia blog,quoting the Australian trade paper Lawyers’ Weekly:
Stephanie Booker, another (College Of Law )  PLT student, questioned whether ‘practical legal training’ is an accurate term. “[My course] certainly taught me where to look for things that I may need — rules, areas of law… As for helping me to apply these rules, there is a huge difference between the reality of my workplace and the comfort of my PLT course. For example, I find that the way I draft letters for [my course] is not acceptable in my workplace, and vice versa.”
The LPAB in its Annual Report gives the impression of a routine renewal of accreditation despite the complaints against the College Of Law,which go back to at least 2006.
The College’s CEO  has admitted that the problems have persisted well into at least the middle of this decade and his admission is a matter of public record.
The LPAB’s 2015-16 Annual Report cannot therefore be considered complete;the fact that its contents are contradicted by a publicly available statement of the CEO of an entity it supervises suggests that the exclusion of that information  is not accidental.
As this writer has shown in an earlier post (see below) this is not the only exclusion from the LPAB’s Annual Reports.
SEE ALSO

Share this:

Malaysian Government confirms that debt will be kept hidden: Tony Pua's explaining the "fallacies" concerning the toll road loan SPV has the opposite effect

by Ganesh Sahathevan



Tony Pua: Govt need not pay a single sen to acquire toll concessionaires





In the words of Lim Guan Eng's special adviser , Tony Pua, published on the Malaysiakini website, 6 July 2019:


Fallacy 1: Government will be burdened unnecessarily with huge debt

Firstly, they argued that the acquisition will increase the government’s debt burden by RM6.2 billion, which could be better spent for other purposes.

While a designated special purpose vehicle (SPV) would be raising a RM6.2 billion debt to finance the acquisition of the four concessionaires, there needs to be a distinction between debt which the government will ultimately have to bear, versus debt which will be self-financed.

In this case, the RM6.2 billion will be entirely self-financed via the collection of proposed congestion charges. This means that the government would not need to fork out a single sen to pay for the acquisition of these highways. Hence the argument that the proposed acquisition will burden the government with the funds better spent elsewhere is completely untrue.


While a designated special purpose vehicle (SPV) would be raising a RM6.2 billion debt to finance the acquisition of the four concessionaires, there needs to be a distinction between debt which the government will ultimately have to bear, versus debt which will be self-financed.

This writer trusts that the above is self-explanatory. See also previous story below.

END


Saturday, June 29, 2019


Is the Malaysian Government hiding liabilities -Is the toll road SPV one of many?

by Ganesh Sahathevan

This statement by the Minister For Finance Lim Guan Eng is nonsense: 


“The collection of congestion charge (for use of the toll roads) will be sufficient to service the debt, as well as to finance the operation and maintenance costs of the highways without requiring additional budget allocation by MOF.
“In other words, the acquisition cost will be self-financing through the collection of congestion charge and will not require any government expenditure,” Lim said.

The acquisition will be  financed by debt,and via a SPV wholly-owned by the MOF Inc (see story below). Its debts are debts of the Malaysian Government.It is hard to tell if it is the only SPV that is being used by the Malaysian Government to keep liabilities and outflows off the books.
END 





SEE ALSO

Friday, July 5, 2019

Riza Aziz has been charged at last,but the Malaysian Govt continues to rely on the DOJ to recover the related assets

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Re-posting given these developments in Malaysia:


Najib Razak said the money laundering charges levelled at his stepson, Riza Aziz, were politically motivated, noting that the US Department of Justice (DoJ) had dropped a forfeiture suit against the Hollywood film producer.




As reported on this blog in March 2019, nothing was "dropped",and instead the DOJ continues to pursue Riza Aziz's assets worldwide. Meanwhile, the Malaysian Government has still not recovered anything.........





hursday, March 7, 2019


US DOJ continues to seize Najib's son Riza Aziz's assets; meanwhile in Malaysia.......

by Ganesh Sahathevan


Riza Admits He Stole 1MDB Money - Pays US$60 Million!
Riza Admits He Stole 1MDB Money - Pays US$60 Million!


While the Malaysian Government has yet to recover anything of significance from former PM Najib Razak and his family, the US Department Of Justice continues to identify and recover 1MDB linked  assets from  family members like step son Riza Aziz.

The US$ 60 Million settlement Riza and friends entered into with the DOJ in March last year (see Sarawak Report story above) does not seem to have stopped the DOJ from pursuing them for 1MDB linked assets.

In further action announced three weeks ago the DOJ announced that it had seized a further USD 38 Million in assets. See DOJ press release and documents below. Meanwhile in Malaysia Najib's 1MDB linked charges continue to be delayed,postponed and pushed on to no foreseeable conclusion.
END


References

First recall this report of a settlement in March 2018:

'Wolf of Wall Street' maker settles US lawsuit for $60 million  



Now see links at 

Excerpt from document at the last link 

  The defendants in this action are: (1) up to $28,174,145.52 in escrow account number ‘7176 held by escrow agent Squire Patton Boggs (US) LLP at Huntington National Bank; 


(2) up to $1,148,739.35 in account number ‘6111 held in the name of Christopher Joey McFarland at Barclays Bank of Delaware; and 


(3) up to $162,486.88 in account number ‘9340 held in the name of Christopher Joey McFarland at Fidelity Investments, Inc., all of which being traceable to equity in COMPANY 1, a facilities management company headquartered in Newport, Kentucky (“DEFENDANT ASSETS”).


 3. The persons and entities whose interests may be affected by this action are Riza Shariz Bin Abdul AzizChristopher Joey McFarland,Nina Partners, LLC, Red Granite Investment Holdings, LLC, and Red Granite Pictures, LLC. 





InvolvingMalaysianSovereignWealthFund

Date 23/02/2019
http://www.mondovisione.com/media-and-resources/news/department-of-justice-us-seeks-to-recover-approximately-38-million-allegedly/?fbclid=IwAR1aLYJPBMg8ma_DE61xnG_glUGtztWHezepCac62aB7uEjYGu1kMZ4WuS4
The Justice Department announced today the filing of civil forfeiture complaints seeking the forfeiture and recovery of approximately $38 million in assets allegedly associated with an international conspiracy to launder funds misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), a Malaysian sovereign wealth fund.  Combined with civil forfeiture complaints filed in July 2016 seeking more than $1 billion in assets, and civil forfeiture complaints filed in June 2017 seeking approximately $540 million in assets, this case represents the largest action brought under the Department’s Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative.  Assets now subject to forfeiture in this case total approximately $1.7 billion.
Assistant Attorney General Brian A. Benczkowski of the Justice Department’s Criminal Division, U.S. Attorney Nicola T. Hanna of the Central District of California, Assistant Director Robert Johnson of the FBI’s Criminal Investigative Division and Chief Don Fort of the IRS Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) made the announcement.
According to the complaints, from 2009 through 2015, more than $4.5 billion in funds belonging to 1MDB were allegedly misappropriated by high-level officials of 1MDB and their associates.  1MDB was created by the government of Malaysia to promote economic development in Malaysia through global partnerships and foreign direct investment, and its funds were intended to be used for improving the well-being of the Malaysian people. 
“The complaints filed today demonstrate the Department of Justice’s steadfast commitment to recovering assets traceable to the alleged multi-billion dollar looting of Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund,” said Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski.  “The Criminal Division and our law enforcement partners are committed to protecting the U.S. financial system and ensuring that the proceeds of overseas corruption and other criminal conduct find no safe haven here.”
“These new lawsuits target assets collected by corrupt officials and their associates through a massive scheme that stole billions of dollars from the people of Malaysia and laundered the proceeds across the world,” said U.S. Attorney Nick Hanna.  “Through a series of cases filed over the past three years, we have pursued a wide variety of assets purchased with stolen 1MDB funds, and so far we have successfully forfeited hundreds of millions of dollars. Collectively, these cases send a strong message that the United States cannot be used as a safe haven or a conduit for money pilfered by corrupt officials.”
“Today’s announcement is a testament to the FBI’s relentless effort to investigate kleptocracy and hold corrupt foreign officials accountable,” said FBI Assistant Director Johnson.  “At the onset of this investigation, we promised to work with our foreign and domestic partners to identify and return stolen assets to the Malaysian people.  This filing demonstrates our unwavering commitment to keep that promise.  We want to thank our partners, both domestic and foreign, for their hard work in helping to bring justice for the Malaysian people.  The recovery of these assets is another step in that direction.”
“The investigation into the misappropriation of the 1MDB funds represents a model for international cooperation in significant cross-border money laundering matters, and sends a message that criminals cannot evade law enforcement authorities simply by laundering money through multiple jurisdictions and through a web of shell corporations,” said IRS-CI Chief Fort.  “We are proud of the investigative work on this case and the work of our fellow law enforcement agencies in this and other complex financial investigations.”
As alleged in the complaints, the members of the conspiracy – which included officials at 1MDB, their relatives and other associates – diverted more than $4.5 billion in 1MDB funds.  Using fraudulent documents and representations, the co-conspirators allegedly laundered the funds through a series of complex transactions and shell companies with bank accounts located in the U.S. and abroad.  These transactions allegedly served to conceal the origin, source and ownership of the funds, and ultimately passed through U.S. financial institutions to then be used to acquire and invest in assets located in the U.S. and overseas.
As alleged in the earlier complaints, in 2009, 1MDB officials and their associates embezzled approximately $1 billion that was supposed to be invested to exploit energy concessions purportedly owned by a foreign partner.  Instead, the funds were allegedly transferred through shell companies and were used to acquire a number of assets, as set forth in the complaints.  The complaints also allege that the co-conspirators misappropriated close to $1.4 billion in funds raised through bond offerings in 2012, and more than $1.2 billion following another bond offering in 2013.  The complaints also allege that in 2014, the co-conspirators misappropriated approximately $850 million in 1MDB funds under the guise of repurchasing certain options that had been given in connection with a guarantee of the 2012 bonds.
The complaints filed today in the Central District of California identify additional assets traceable to the 2012 and 2013 bond offerings.  These assets include luxury real estate in London, proceeds from the sale of luxury real estate in New York City, and converted equity in a facilities management company headquartered in Kentucky.    
The FBI’s International Corruption Squads in New York City and Los Angeles and the IRS-CI are investigating the case.  Deputy Chief Woo S. Lee and Trial Attorneys Kyle R. Freeny, Jonathan Baum, Barbara Levy and Joshua L. Sohn of the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section and Assistant U.S. Attorneys John Kucera and Michael R. Sew Hoy of the Central District of California are prosecuting the case.  The Criminal Division’s Office of International Affairs is providing substantial assistance.
The Department also appreciates the significant assistance provided by the Attorney General’s Chambers of Malaysia, the Royal Malaysian Police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, the Attorney General’s Chambers of Singapore, the Singapore Police Force-Commercial Affairs Division, the Office of the Attorney General and the Federal Office of Justice of Switzerland, the judicial investigating authority of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, and the Criminal Investigation Department of the Grand-Ducal Police of Luxembourg.
The Kleptocracy Asset Recovery Initiative is led by a team of dedicated prosecutors in the Criminal Division’s Money Laundering and Asset Recovery Section, in partnership with federal law enforcement agencies, and often with U.S. Attorney’s Offices, to forfeit the proceeds of foreign official corruption and, where appropriate, to use those recovered assets to benefit the people harmed by these acts of corruption and abuse of office.  In 2015, the FBI formed International Corruption Squads across the country to address national and international implications of foreign corruption.  Individuals with information about possible proceeds of foreign corruption located in or laundered through the U.S. should contact federal law enforcement or send an email to kleptocracy@usdoj.gov (link sends e-mail) or https://tips.fbi.gov/.
A civil forfeiture complaint is merely an allegation that money or property was involved in or represents the proceeds of a crime.  These allegations are not proven until a court awards judgment in favor of the United States.