YOURSAY | ‘How can the PAC deputy chairperson say Najib was not directly involved?’

Tan stands by his remarks, but says he didn’t defend Najib

Proarte: Petaling Jaya Utara MP Tony Pua had primed the nation to expect highly damaging revelations to PM Najib Razak's credibility when the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) report was presented to Parliament, but this was effectively neutralised by his DAP colleague Tan Seng Giaw's comments to the press which I am now convinced was calculated to shield Najib from culpability and to undermine the credibility of the PAC report.

Indeed, Umno politicians are telling the rakyat that even the DAP has absolved Najib of responsibility for the 1MDB scandal.

DAP has let down the nation terribly and expect this to be reflected in the Sarawak state election. It would be no loss to Sarawakians who are crying out for a new paradigm to have DAP politicians like Tan banned from Sarawak as they are working in the interest of BN.

Is Tan, who is the deputy PAC chairperson, willing to hold a joint press conference with Pua to corroborate the above shocking allegations? Tan's words to the press which had the effect of throwing a political lifeline to Najib must rank as one of the greatest political blunders an opposition politician could make unless of course it was intentional.

How could DAP have such a clownish, inarticulate buffoon like Tan among its senior ranks? The unforgivable fact is DAP has given Najib a fig leaf to hide the shame of this obscene scandal of gross proportions.

Odin Tajué: Tan, it is appreciated that you have confirmed that Malaysiakini has quoted you correctly. Those of us who have at least a pair of neurons and synapses functioning well know that you meant Najib was involved, although not directly but indirectly.

The problem is that you have, among your audience, people whose brains are, to borrow an American expression, fried, and those who are much partial to ‘editing' statements to suit their purpose.

Bearing in mind the existence of such people, you would be well advised to speak in simpler terms in future. Utter short sentences and ones that even village idiots can understand. In other words, leave no room for doubts or miscomprehension, and demand very little, if any, thinking.

Ferdtan: For the eight-term parliamentarian Tan to issue a naive and simplistic statement that “Najib was not involved in 1MBD”, he is acting like a novice schoolboy politician. No way he is that; he with his years of experience is not that stupid to come up with such a faux pas.

It was a calculative move to help/relieve Najib (to a certain extent of contradicting/offsetting the impact of his fellow party parliamentarian’s critique against PM) for whatever his motive.

Tan should search his conscience. We don’t believe him that he is sincere. There is more to it than meets the eye.

Now he is trying to justify his action by playing with words, such as that he did not say Najib was not involved directly. We call upon all voters not to vote for him if he is once again selected as a candidate in Kepong.

Spinnot: Tan, who sacked 1MDB's auditor KPMG? Was the auditor sacked "directly" or "indirectly"?

Anonymous 23651434356067: If you say that you are concluding based only on the given evidence, how could the given evidence be sufficient enough to make a conclusion?

The conclusion can be wrong when you are aware that the respective persons refused to provide the evidence on overseas transactions. Refusing to provide the available information is itself can be an evidence to cover up wrongdoing.

It is just like a person committing a murder. There is evidence he has hidden the murder weapon and refuses to surrender it. So is it considered that he is innocent because it cannot be concluded what weapon was used to commit the murder?

Wg321: How can the PAC deputy chairperson say that Najib was not directly involved in the running of 1MDB when the former PAC chairperson Nur Jazlan Mohamed reportedly said that 1MDB has bypassed the government’s due process framework by reporting straight to Najib?

Besides, according to clause 117 of the memorandum and articles of association (M&A) of 1MDB, Najib has the veto power in the running of 1MDB. Consequently, all policy decisions of 1MDB must be approved by Najib.

He even sacked the auditors KPMG without informing the Finance Ministry. By saying in an unqualified manner that Najib is not directly involved in 1MDB, Tan has damaged his own reputation.

The only way is that he must withdraw his statement if he valued the support of his voters.

Basically: This plan to distance the PM from 1MDB was predicted months ago by the foreign media. But the fact remains, as chairperson of the advisory board and one who is required to sign off on all deals as what the M&A says, claiming ignorance is not an option.

At the very least, the board could be guilty of gross negligence. Especially when 1MDB started raking in billions in debt. Was the advisory board sleeping? Is this a valid excuse?

LifeFlier: Tan, you let your enemy draw the boundary of the battlefield. Why confine yourself to the scope of investigation with many blind spots? Why did you succumb yourself to the choices that the enemy presented to you?

You have the right not to choose and not to accept the PAC report. There is one apt word to describe you, Tan – incompetent.

Waktamnoko: The general public, in particular those in the urban areas, do not buy the PAC report.

It may even have an adverse political effect on BN come the next election. But of course, this can only happen if the opposition is able to get its act together, which to date it has not been able to.

Come 2018, the opposition might even be routed not because BN was stronger but because technically, there is no opposition in the real sense.

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.