Years of speculation as to who drafted private investigator P Balasubramaniam’s second statutory declaration dramatically came to a close on 16 March 2013 at the Bar Council’s 67th annuel general meeting when Bala’s lawyer, Americk Sidhu, revealed the identity of the person.
Years of speculation as to who drafted private investigator P Balasubramaniam’s second statutory declaration dramatically came to a close on 16 March 2013 at the Bar Council’s 67th annual general meeting when Bala’s lawyer, Americk Sidhu, revealed the identity of the person.
Americk informed the gathering that his “prominent colleague Cecil Abraham had admitted to acting on Najib’s instructions to prepare a second statutory declaration (SD2) for the purpose of overturning a first (SD1), which had been prepared by another lawyer.” (The SD1, dated 1 July 2008, very carefully detailed events and occasions that linked Najib to Altantuya and implicated his involvement in the death of Altantuya.)
This bombshell must have shocked everyone present – even though there were lingering suspicions of the lawyer concerned. As a result of this disclosure, their suspicion became an established fact now, shocking the legal fraternity.
Malaysians were stunned into disbelief – not because a senior lawyer was involved, but rather because SD2 was prepared on the instructions of the Prime Minister, who was then the DPM and Defence Minister!
It is thus very clear that Najib, who was implicated in the death of Alyantuya in SD1, wanted every reference alluded to his involvement to be removed. Attempting to cover-up his alleged criminality only compounded the crime.
He seemingly had no qualms in creating a false SD in the name of Bala without his knowledge and consent to extricate himself. Bala was then forced to sign this SD2 with the promise of a huge sum of money by Najib’s brother, Nazim.
He was indeed perverting the course of justice and for this purpose had wilfully created a fictitious SD by instructing a lawyer to do this evil deed.
This desperate act on his part only cast more dark shadows on his character, creating the impression that after all there must be some merit in the accusation.
If he was indeed innocent of what he was deemed to be involved in, all that he had to do was sue the person who was insinuating and implicating him in the murder of Altantuya. He had all the time to do this but he did not.
His conduct reminds us of the saying, “Truth is not only violated by falsehood; it may be outraged by silence.”
Najib is now under a cloud of suspicion. His moral character and his integrity are in question. His name has been sullied. The office he holds has been tainted beyond repair. Under the circumstances, he must step down as PM until his name is cleared. He must not drag his office through the mud. His office must not be tarnished.
When a civil servant is accused of serious misconduct, he is suspended on half pay while his case is being investigated. When he is cleared of the charge, he is reinstated. If he is found guilty he could be dismissed if the offence was serious enough.
Likewise, the PM must vacate his position paving the way for a thorough investigation into his case. He must be cleared of any impropriety through a proper investigation. Only then can he assume his post and continue to act as the PM.
In the meantime, his deputy, Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, can be the acting PM.
We are reminded of a similar incident in the 1970s when a head of a state tried to cover-up a crime. In 1972 President Nixon ordered the bugging of the Democratic National Committee Headquarters at the Watergate office complex in Washington DC, which in itself was a crime. But he went beyond that. He tried to cover up his crime.
It was such a serious crime that Congress impeached him. On 9 August 1974, he resigned. A foul deed committed by a head of state cannot and should not be tolerated.
As such, Malaysians expect a full and thorough investigation into this sordid affair. For the investigation to proceed smoothly, Najib should not be in office; otherwise, there would be interference as was the case in the SD1.
Malaysians will have no faith in an internal police investigation. They expect no less than a Royal Commission of Inquiry to be set up to get to the bottom of the truth. Accusations and allegations of murder, perversion of justice, interfering with evidence are very serious charges that there must be no delay in setting up the RCI.
Aliran Executive Committee
19 March 2013