Friday, July 22, 2016

Tak Boleh Salahkan Anwar, Mahathir Pulak Menjadi Mangsa


Kalaulah Anwar Ibrahim tidak berada dalam penjara ketika ini, tentu beliau dipersalahkan bila DoJ US buat sidang media tentang penyelewengan 1MDB itu..

Tapi oleh kerana Anwar Ibrahim sedang dipenjara maka Anwar terlepas, kalau mereka tetap salahkan Anwar Ibrahim juga bangang sangatlah namanya tu..

Kalau tidak semua keburukan yang berlaku baik dalam Malaysia atau di luar Malaysia yang berkaitan dengan Malaysia habis diletakkan di atas kepala Anwar.

Menariknya kini.. setelah Anwar tak boleh dipersalahkan lagi, mantan Presiden mereka sendiri pula yang dijadikan mangsa.. ha..ha..ha..

Salleh Keruak dakwa geng Mahathir dibelakang saman oleh DoJ berkaitan 1MDB itu..

Tak boleh salahkan Anwar, Mahathir pulak menjadi mangsa..

KUALA LUMPUR, July 22 — Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s allies are behind the US Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit seeking to recover more than US$1 billion in assets bought with money allegedly embezzled from 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB), minister Datuk Seri Dr Salleh Said Keruak claimed. 
In a blog post yesterday, the communications and multimedia minister wrote that he was made to understand that “certain people” aligned to the former prime minister had lodged complaints with the US government. 
“From our understanding the action currently being taken is based on complaints made by a third party or certain people aligned to Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, who are not actually the aggrieved party. 
“Under US law, however, class action suits are allowed and the complainant can claim locus standi merely by virtue of the fact that he or she is a Malaysian citizen,” he wrote. 
Salleh said the aggrieved party in the case was none other than 1MDB and added that it was problematic for the US to take action based on money allegedly stolen or transferred from the local state investment firm. 
“The problem here, though, is that 1MDB itself has said it has not lost any money or no money has been stolen from it. 
“If the US had chosen criminal action then the burden of proof would be on the prosecutor to prove guilt. 
“In this case, they have chosen civil action and after freezing or confiscating the assets of the accused, the accused will need to prove that the assets were legally and not illegally acquired. This shifts the burden of proof from the prosecutor to the accused,” he wrote. 
Please continue yours reading HERE

Nasib hanglah Tun.. hang pi lawan Najib buat apa??



Followers

Archive

Related Posts with Thumbnails