YOURSAY | ‘If the money is legally obtained, he would cross an ocean of fire to claim it back.’

Yoursay: How generous for CID chief to wave away a cool million

Why not reclaim money if it’s indeed ‘clean’, MP asks CID chief


Odin Tajué: For those of us who do not have stolen billions, nor know any extraordinarily generous, mythical Arab princes and genies, nor enjoy the honour and pleasure of having underworld chieftains calling us daily just to wish us a good morning besides receiving hefty ‘ang pows’ now and then, RM971,800 is a lot of money.

If we had such a sum and we were blocked from having access to it, we would fight tooth and nail to regain control over it.

Let’s break this down. I think it is safe to assume that an Australian lawyer’s fees needed to be paid to help us get the money back would amount to around RM200,000. Or let’s be over-pessimistic and say RM400,000. We would still have over RM500,000 left to use.

That is not exactly chicken feed to us. At least, it is not to me. However, we would let it be if we had come to have such a big sum of money through dubious means, or we had received it from unsavoury characters, and there was much more where that money had come from.

But one ought not to cast aspersions on Bukit Aman Criminal Investigation Department (CID) director Wan Ahmad Najmuddin Mohd, for, after all, the personnel of the Malaysian police are all cleaner than a policeman’s whistle. That’s why they are in the police force, right?

Therefore, one would be well advised to assume that RM1 million is an amount that makes him sneeze for months on end, because he can turn plain leaves and pieces of pages of old newspapers into banknotes – and not forgetting that he has sizeable assets here, there and everywhere.

Anonymous 2436471476414726: Wan Ahmad, the allegations by the Australian authorities are very serious. If unchallenged, it would severely tarnish not only your good name but that of the entire police force.

By declaring that you had done no wrong, inspector-general of police Mohamad Fuzi Harun, and indeed, the home minister, seem eager to sweep the matter under the carpet, further denting the integrity of PDRM (Royal Malaysian Police) as well as the Home Ministry.

Therefore, you must pursue all legal means to reclaim the money seized. Giving the lame excuse that it is too expensive to engage lawyers in Australia is tantamount to admitting your guilt.

There are lawyers who would be willing to take up your case on a percentage of the sum frozen if successful. Even if you get back 20 to 30 percent of the money after paying the lawyers, this is still better than losing the nearly RM1 million of your hard-earned money.

Sherlock: First, we say no need for the Swiss government to return the RM400 million in 1MDB-linked funds. Then, we also say no need to claim the seized superyacht (worth RM1 billion).

Now the CID chief also says no need to claim the RM971,800. I know if I sold a house to pay for my children’s education, and that money was taken away, I would fight to kingdom come to claim the money back.

To be so blasé about the close to RM1 million, the CID chief’s pay cheque must truly be something to behold.

RM2.6 Billion Turkey Haram: If the money is legally obtained, he would cross an ocean of fire to claim it back.

But maybe he is only following the example of his big boss, the prime minister, who has nothing to say about the RM400 million stuck in Switzerland.

Anonymous 2475871497500343: How did Wan Ahmad become CID chief in the first place if he is ignorant of the law and has to set up a bank account in Australia with deposits from various locations just to finance his children’s studies?

Nowadays, it is so convenient to remit money to finance your children’s education overseas. If you don’t trust your children to handle huge sums of money in one go, you may remit the money to them online whenever you feel comfortable.

By not claiming the RM971,800, he can’t blame Malaysians for thinking that he is filthy rich.

I’m Watching You: You sell one house for RM700,000 or so, then take the trouble to make multiple small-cash deposits so you don’t have to declare it to Australian authorities.

And Deputy Prime Minister Ahmad Zahid Hamidi says you are “naïve” about Australian law?

Southfolk: So if the money is meant for his children’s education, and he doesn’t want to claim it, does it mean his children have to stop studying? Or is he going to conjure another RM1 million out of thin air?

Abasir: Now that the rabid Australian press has got hold of the details leading to the seizure of almost RM1 million, it’s going to be impossible else to try and ‘kow tim’ (settle) with the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (Austrac).

And Malaysians may expect this to be the topic of the day when Austrac hosts the Asean-Australia Codeathon to combat terrorism financing in Sydney later this month. Malaysia, once again, will be in the news for all the “right” reasons.

Not Convinced: Wan Ahmad, if you don’t want the RM971,800, it’s okay. But I suggest that you use it to hire a team of lawyers to clear your name. That’s more important.

‘CID chief’s refusal to redeem seized money raises questions’

Monty: If any police officer, or for that matter any Malaysian, can so easily forfeit RM971,800, it simply begs the question: just how much are these people earning?

Also, just how much do our Umno leaders have stashed overseas? It is mind-boggling that some voters continue to support these people.

Abasir: With corrupted enforcement agencies headed by corrupt and morally unfit sycophants guarding the roost, there is probably no stopping now.

The unspoken rule appears to be “sapu” (siphon) as much as possible, take it all overseas through any means while preaching law and order to the opposition.

As a nation, we really need to come up with better excuses.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.