Mongolian model murder a potential time bomb?

Mongolian model murder a potential time bomb?

Kim Quek
Anwar Ibrahim’s recent call for transparency and for widening police investigations into the Mongolian model’s murder is a stark reminder that all is not well with the Malaysian government’s handling of this murder case. In fact, the standard of transparency and accountability falls so short of that practiced by a democratic country that once again we are painfully reminded of the perversion of justice that took place in the infamous persecution of Anwar Ibrahim more than eight years ago. The injustice then was to condemn and persecute an innocent man. This time, perhaps it is to provide shelter to one guilty of murder.
As in the earlier Anwar case, democratic institutions - police, attorney general’s chamber, judiciary and the media - seemed to have been mobilised again to act in concert in a critical damage control exercise, upon which may hinge the fate of the power structure of the country. However, before dwelling into the details, let us take a perspective view of the case.
At the heart of the scandal is a beautiful Mongolian girl, Altantuya Shaariibuu, who was rather erroneously known as a model, but in fact a multi-lingual interpreter and translator - Chinese, Russian, English and French - for which she travelled frequently. She was alleged to have been a lover of Abdul Razak Baginda, a political analyst and a confidante of the Deputy Prime Minister cum Minister of Defence Najib Tun Razak. The former travelled extensively and often accompanied the latter in his trips overseas.
The gravity of Altantuya’s bizarre murder - shot and blown to pieces - looms from its indirect link to Najib, as two of his bodyguards were charged for killing and Razak Baginda for abetting; and the explosives used were no ordinary explosives, but high power C-4 which was in the exclusive custody of the ministry of defence. Compounding this gravity was another scandal also indirectly linked to Najib via Razak Baginda, whose company was the dubious recipient of an exorbitant commission paid out in connection with the multi-billion purchase of submarines by the ministry of defence.
So Najib, who in many ways acts like the de facto leader of the country, has become the ultimate focal point of two explosive scandals, albeit linked to him indirectly.
That this scandal touches the nerve centre of the top political hierarchy is apparent from the extraordinary treatment accorded to it by the police, attorney general’s chamber, the judiciary and the local media. The local media’s collaboration was most recently demonstrated in the blackout of news on the Anwar Ibrahim press conference on Jan 10, where apart from calling for wider probe, he also bombarded the authorities with a series of incisive questions which would have hit headlines if Malaysia is a country with a free press.
THE POLICE
Starting with the police, why was Najib not queried? (Reuters on Jan 10 quoted a government source saying that no one else had been questioned other than the three accused). The police had no possible justification not to question Najib, as the alleged murderers and the explosives were in his domain.
Keep in mind that these bodyguards are from the Special Action Force where they were trained for extreme duties and absolute obedience and that they had no apparent motive of their own to annihilate the girl. Take note that Razak Baginda was not charged for ordering but abetting the murder (he couldn’t have ordered any way since he had no authority over them). So who had ordered the bodyguards to abduct the girl while she was attempting to enter Razak’s house and later killed her? Shouldn’t the police have been curious to find out some answers from the bodyguards’ immediate boss (Najib) as to why and how they had embarked on such a violent venture? What inference can we draw when the police failed to act as it should have in regards to Najib? Or do the police know what the public don’t?
And why have the police been extremely tight-lipped over details of the case, with the head of the criminal investigations department (Christopher Wan) remaining steadfastly mum?
Why has the Inspector General of Police (Musa Hassan) taken the most unusual, and in fact, unprecedented measure of taking personal charge of this investigation?
Is it proper for the police to hide crucial facts of the case when the news has been hogging international headlines, casting aspersion on the integrity of the government?
Being also minister of security which controls the police force, Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi is directly responsible for proper police conduct over this investigation. Though he was quick to vow for a no-holds-barred probe and due punishment to the culprits irrespective of status, his words have not been matched by deeds.
PROSECUTOR AND JUDICIARY
Murder is a non-bailable offence. When Razak was granted bond (without security) on Nov. 23 and again extended on bail on Dec. 14 on the questionable ground of having had bronchitis, both the prosecutor and the judge were seen as acting with partiality in favour of the accused, as such bail was rarely granted, safe on grounds of extreme health hazard.
On Jan. 5, Razak’s application for extension of bail was rejected, to the shock of almost every one. However, the rejection was not against the application per se, rather it was against the presentation in oral form. The judge then fixed Jan. 19 to hear the written application.
However, impatient to wait till Jan. 19, Razak appealed and was granted a hearing by the Court of Appear on Jan. 11. The Appellate Court rejected the appeal on the ground that there was no judgment for the court to deliberate on, as the high court had yet to hear the application on Jan. 19.
Apart from his dereliction of duty in failing to oppose bail, the deputy public prosecutor (Salehuddin Saidin) from the A.G.’s chamber had also engaged in improper conduct when he ruled out the possible involvement of parties other than the three accused when the investigation is manifestly incomplete and the self-motivation of the killers ostentatiously lacking. His overzealous push for such a premature conclusion has thus fanned further speculation on the existence of a real master mind behind the three accused.
Perhaps what disappoints the public most is the distant date fixed for the hearing - March 10, 2008. The judge’s (K.N.Segara) explanation of first-come-first-serve cuts no ice. For an important case like this, where the integrity of the highest strata of the government is brought into question at home and abroad, the court has every justification to allocate priority, since it serves public interests to have justice served and law and order restored to regain public confidence at the earliest.
Here again, we are reminded of the contrast in treatment accorded by the court between the Anwar Ibrahim trial for corruption (no money involved) and the present murder trial. If the Anwar trial could commence in just over a month from his arrest, why can’t the present trial, which involves an offence many times more serious, be also given an expeditious trial? Does this not confirm the oft-repeated accusation that our judiciary acts under the dictates of the Executive - insignificant charges could be tried by express, while trials for grave charges could be pushed off, if such judicial arrangements so suit the political interests of the power that be?
SUBMARINE SCANDAL
The key to any murder case is the motive. This is where we have to bring in the submarines deal scandal, for Altantuya’s apparent part in it may provide an important lead to the motivation of this murder.
Reports from Mongolia have thrown light on Altantuya’s working relationship with Razak Baginda. Based on an interview with Altantuya’s father Professor Shaariibuu, a report states that the Professor has established from Altantuya’s documents that the latter had been rendering translation and secretarial services to Razak, interpreting for him in high level meetings and negotiation. In particular, she had assisted Razak in the submarines deal. The Professor further stated that the main purpose of Altantuya’s recent trip to Malaysia was to demand settlement of the fees due to her.
Such demand for fees would have been treated as an ordinary affair, if not for the fact that there is a dark side to this submarine deal.
The Malaysian ministry of defence pays one billion euros (RM 4.5 billion) to the vendor Amaris (French/Spanish JV) for three submarines (including a used one), for which transaction, Razak’s company Perimekar receives a commission of 114 million euros (RM 510 million) from Amaris. The commission is a whopping 11% of the sales value, a ridiculously high figure that suggests improprieties. Excessive as the figure might sound, the true hidden leakage could be very much more if consideration is given to the fact that the sales was not conducted through competitive tenders.
Being the interpreter, who happened to be a charming person, Altantuya could have played an important role in sealing the deal. And considering that this is a deal where money flows freely, it would not be far fetched to imagine that Altantuya could have been promised a more than generous fee, in addition to privy to information that could not be leaked out without causing grievous damage to others.
Under such circumstances, Altantuya could be looked upon as an unwelcome and dangerous visitor if there were irreconcilable differences between her and her Malaysian clients, whether these arose from pecuniary conflicts or sexual entanglement as widely rumoured.
It is obvious that investigations into the murder case cannot be meaningfully pursued without at the same time probing into the submarine deal scandal. In this connection, the participation of our docile Anti-Corruption Agency is long overdue.
This is the time that Prime Minister must show his leadership by personally ensuring that these two law-enforcing bodies directly under his portfolios - police and ACA - work hand in hand to expeditiously secure a full and fair investigation into the murder case as well as to bring the corrupt to book in the submarine corruption scandal. He should further ensure that the judiciary and the attorney general’s chamber be allowed to deliver justice without interference from the Executive.