Archive for October, 2008

Altantuya tears in heaven: A Malaysian court acquitted a key aide of Deputy Prime Minister

Posted in politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

From The Wall Street Journal

By JAMES HOOKWAY

A Malaysian court acquitted a key aide of Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak of abetting the murder of a Mongolian woman in 2006.

The verdict could ease political pressure on Mr. Najib as he prepares to assume Malaysia’s premiership next year. But it is also likely to reignite public criticism over the independence and competence of Malaysia’s police, prosecutors and judiciary.

High Court Justice Mohamed Zaki Mohamed Yasin ruled Friday that government prosecutors had failed to establish a prima facie case against 48 year-old Abdul Razak Baginda, a prominent political analyst and close friend and adviser to Mr. Najib.

Mr. Abdul Razak, who is married, had been charged with abetting the killing of Altantuya Shaariibuu, a 28 year-old Mongolian translator and part-time model with whom he admitted he had an eight-month affair. Mr. Abdul Razak would have faced a possible death sentence had he been convicted.

Together with Mr. Abdul Razak, two Malaysian police officers – members of an elite force assigned to Mr. Najib’s personal security detail — were also on trial for allegedly killing Ms. Shaariibuu and then blowing up her body with military-grade plastic explosives.

The court ordered their trial, which began almost two years ago, to proceed and requested the two police officers to submit their defense against the murder charge.

During the 151 day-long trial, the prosecution had argued that Mr. Abdul Razak had ordered the Mongolian woman’s murder when she allegedly hounded him for money after he broke off their affair in 2005. His acquittal appears to leave the prosecution without an alternative motive for the murder allegedly carried out by the police officers.

Mr. Najib’s political opponents have persistently tried to implicate him in the murder investigation, even as he prepared to take over leadership of Malaysia’s ruling National Front government. Mr. Najib is expected to replace Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi as premier in March 2009.

Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim – himself facing trial on charges of sodomy, a crime in Malaysia – earlier this year presented a private investigator, who offered a sworn statement saying that Mr. Abdul Razak had informed him that Mr. Najib had also had an affair with Ms. Shaariibuu. The investigator, P. Balasubramaniam, later retracted his statement and went into hiding.

Prominent antigovernment blogger Raja Petra Kamaruddin, who is currently imprisoned, has also repeatedly attempted to link Mr. Najib to the murder case in his popular website Malaysia Today. Mr. Petra was arrested without charges under Malaysia’s Internal Security Act in September, allegedly for insulting the Islamic religion.

Mr. Najib has denied ever having met Ms. Shaariibuu or having anything to do with her murder.

Mr. Abdul Razak’s acquittal appears set to fuel a new round of allegations of political interference in police investigations and the judicial system, which for years has faced accusations that it protects the country’s powerful politicians.

“There is growing perception that the investigation was not done professionally. There is a clear motive to cover up — a lot of evidence was not adduced,” opposition leader Mr. Anwar told local reporters Friday. “The prosecution has failed to conduct the case professionally from the beginning.”

Mr. Anwar has contended that allegations of sodomy against him – which he denies – were fabricated to destroy his political career. He was convicted and jailed on similar charges a decade ago before his conviction was later overturned on appeal.

The Mongolian murder trial has also been controversial and studded with false starts and miscues. Early on, the original judge assigned to the trail was replaced and the prosecution team changed. Testimony from some of the more than 80 witnesses called by the prosecution was vague and sometimes contradictory and some evidence was barred from submission or ruled invalid.

Ms. Shaariibuu’s father, who was present at the verdict, told reporters he wasn’t satisfied. “My daughter is dead and [Mr. Abdul Razak] is free,” Shaariibuu Setev told reporters at the court. “The country has lost credibility in the world.”

Mr. Abdul Razak declined to speak to reporters after his acquittal.

What did he mean by ‘tentative charge but all is not lost’?

Posted in politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

On 11th October, Malaysia Today carried a post entitled ‘Abuse of power by the Deputy Prime Minister’ that laid out a series of sms’es alleged to have passed between Najib and senior lawyer Shafee Abdullah in relation to Razak Baginda’s arrest and remand in the days before Baginda was charged.

Najib was publicly asked to comment about these sms’es and he never denied the authenticity of the same.

Now, there’s one other exchange of sms’es, this time allegedly between Razak Baginda and Najib. I do not recall Najib himself having ever addressed or denied or admitted the correctness or otherwise of these sms’es directly, as he did with the series of sms’es referred to in the MT posting.

I am referring to the 2 sms’es mentioned at paragraphs 51 and 52 of the first statutory declaration of private investigator Balasubramaniam. Let me reproduce below both paragraphs 51 and 52 of that first statutory declaration.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30am. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before as he refused to believe he was to be arrested, but had not received a response.

52. Shortly thereafter, at about 7.30am, Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Najib Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows: “ I am seeing IGP at 11am today …  matter will be solved … be cool”.

Like all of you, I am aware of Bala’s second statutory declaration contradicting the first, but we also have to acknowledge that the circumstances surrounding the making and public announcement of the second statutory declaration, and the subsequent disappearance of the maker of both, might make it prudent for us to defer adjudging which of the two statutory declarations narrates the truth until such time that Bala is available to fully disclose and explain the circumstances surrounding the making of both statutory delcarations.

In paragraph 51, Bala claims to have been with Razak Baginda at 6.30am at the latter’s lawyers office on the day that the latter was arrested.

Based on a Star online report, Razak Baginda was arrested on 7th November, 2006.

If the matters averred in both paragraphs of the first statutory declaration as mentioned above are true, it would mean that apart from Bala, Razak Baginda’s lawyer, too, would have seen the sms referred to in paragraph 52.

Which leads me to a question that has been troubling me : Who was that lawyer? Was it Shafee? And if it was not Shafee, then who was it?

The sms’es detailed in the MT posting actually start from the morning of 8th November. I have reproduced the sms’es of 8th November detailed in the MT post below.

Wednesday 8/11/2006

Shafee to Najib (S2N) Date: 8/11/2006 02:59:31

–> Dato Seri, The Razak Baginda thing is troubling me.Can I help? Salam, Shafee

Najib to Shafee (N2S) Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:05

–> I will speak with u later tonight.

S2N Date: 8/11/2006 03:45:31

–> Thank you

S2N Date: 8/11/2006 06:28:56

–> Met the investigating officer today.Position is serious for RB.The 3 are highly implicated.RB’s case can be fought.There are redeeming features for him.But we need to meet Dato Seri as there are other looming issues at large.But not to worry. Salam > Shafee

N2S Date: 8/11/2006 21:06:11

–> I have spoken to IGP. U can represent n meet RB in court.

The first sms from Shafee to Najib, at a little before 3am on 8th November, would seem to suggest that Shafee was then not yet acting on the case. Forty-five minutes later, Najib responds to say they would talk later. Some three hours later, Shafee sms’es Najib to say that Shafee had met up with the investigating officer. Note that this sms is at 6.28am on the morning of 8th November.

It would appear that Shafee could not have been the lawyer referred to by Bala in paragraphs 51 and 52 of his first statutory declaration. If so, and again assuming that all Bala said was correct, who, then, was that lawyer.

Najib has not denied that eight days later, on 16th November, 2006, Najib sms’d Shafee to say :

–> Pls do not say anything to the press today. i will explain later. RB will have to face a tentative charge but all is not lost.

We know from the sms before this one that Shafee was then in court to represent Razak Baginda.

That same day, 16th November, Razak Baginda was charged under Section 109 of the Penal Code and read together with Section 302 of the same code, with abetment in the murder of Altantuya.

Was this the ‘tentative charge’ that Najib was referring to?

If so, what did Najib mean by ‘tentative’, and why was all ‘not lost’? Who had alerted Najib that Baginda would be slapped with this ‘tentative charge’, and when was this made known to Najib?

And did ‘all is not lost’ have any connection with a meeting that was supposed to take place on the morning that Razak Baginda was arrested, at 11am, as alluded to in the alleged sms in paragraph 52 above?

Did such a meeting take place on the morning that Razak was arrested, or any time after?

Was there such an sms as was alluded to in paragraph 52 of Bala’s first statutory declaration?

And if there was such an sms, who was the lawyer who also read it, as claimed by Bala?

Does anyone know?

Haris Ibrahim

Letter from People’s Parliament on Altantuya Case

Posted in politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

31st October, 2008
1. Yang Berkhidmat Tan Sri Bernard G. Dompok, e-mail : n4upko@yahoo.com
President,
United Pasokmomogun Kadazandusun Murut Organisation,
Ibu Pejabat UPKO,
Lot 9 & 10, Tingkat 2 & 3,
New World Commercial Centre,
Pekan Penampang,
Peti Surat 420,
89507 Penampang, Sabah.
2. Yang Berkhidmat Dato’ Seri Ong Tee Keat, e-mail : info@mca.org.my
President,
Malaysian Chinese Association,
8th Floor, Wisma MCA, 163,
Jalan Ampang,
50450 Kuala Lumpur.
3. Yang Berkhidmat Tan Sri Dr. Koh Tsu Khoon, e-mail : gerakan@gerakan.org.my
President,
Parti Gerakan Rakyat Malaysia,
Level 5, Menara PGRM,
8, Jln Pudu Ulu, Cheras,
56100, Kuala Lumpur
Dear Yang Berkhidmat – Yang Berkhidmat,
Re : The Sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia
____________________________________________________________
God’s peace be with you.
I am a Malaysian citizen. I also moderate a blog called ‘The People’s Parliament’.
I am writing to you because you are the only leaders within Barisan Nasional in whom I
dare place my hopes that my concerns relating to the person who aspires to soon be
appointed as the sixth Prime Minister of Malaysia will receive genuine attention and,
hopefully, positive action.
P15-2 & P15-3, Jalan Chui Yin,
28700 Bentong, Pahang
Tel : 09-2226332/8332
Fax : 09-2227332
e-mail : thepeoplesparliament@gmail.com

Yang Berkhidmat Tan Sri Bernard, allow me to say that I have long admired and
appreciated your willingness, when your colleagues in the Barisan Nasional chose to
remain silent for reasons best known to them, to speak up and remain steadfast on
issues of national concern. Many of us remember how, in early 2006, you were the only
non-Muslim minister who did not retract the memorandum earlier submitted by you
and nine of your other non-Muslim colleagues in the cabinet to the Prime Minister
following upon the controversial refusal of the civil High Court to adjudicate on the
matter of the faith of the deceased Everest climber, Sarjen Moorthy. We have also not
forgotten how, when the Deputy Prime Minister rather irresponsibly and baselessly
declared last year that Malaysia is an Islamic state, yours was the lone voice that publicly
disputed this groundless claim.
Yang Berkhidmat Dato’ Seri Ong and Yang Berkhidmat Tan Sri Dr. Koh, it is my sincere
hope that as you have both only recently been elected to the pinnacle of your respective
parties, both of which have demonstrated, since the 12th General Elections, a greater
sensitivity to the wishes and concerns of the electorate and a willingness to speak up on
those wishes and concerns, you will now lead your parties with the requisite courage to
address the concerns which I now wish to draw your attention to.
We are soon to see a changing of the guard in UMNO.
Barring any surprises, it is expected that, unless brought forward to December this year
as is being speculated by certain quarters, the UMNO general assembly will take place in
March 2009 whereafter, it appears to be a foregone conclusion that Yang Berkhidmat
Dato Seri Najib will take over the presidency of UMNO from Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri
Abdullah Ahmad Badawi.
That is not my concern.
My concern, and that of a great many, is the assumption and assertion by many in
UMNO, and the seeming acquiescence to the same by the leaders of the other
component parties in Barisan Nasional, that if and when Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri
Najib takes over the presidency of UMNO, he will, as a matter of course, take over the
Prime Ministership of this country because, so the argument seems to go, he will then be
the president of UMNO and the Prime Minister of Malaysia has and will always be the
president of UMNO.

I perceive two difficulties with this argument. One is constitutional, the other one of
perception of, firstly, the general public, and secondly, Members of Parliament, as to the
suitability of Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib for the office of Prime Minister.
In truth, the second difficulty will become immediately apparent when the first difficulty
as mentioned above and detailed below is fully appreciated.
The argument that the Prime Minister has always to be the president of UMNO is, with
respect, flawed and contradicts Article 43(2) of the Federal Constitution which, in the
most unambiguous language, stipulates that His Majesty the Yang Di Pertuan Agong
shall appoint as Prime Minister, the one who ‘in his judgment is likely to command the
confidence of the majority of the members of’ the Dewan Rakyat.
The Constitution does not stipulate that His Majesty shall appoint the president of
UMNO as Prime Minister, but the one who, in the judgment of His Majesty, is likely to
command the confidence of the majority of the members of’ the Dewan Rakyat.
No doubt, the previous three Prime Ministers were and the current Prime Minister is the
president of UMNO. What must be noted, though, is that at the time of their respective
appointments, no one seriously thought to question, let alone doubted, whether any of
the previous three Prime Ministers or the current one commanded the confidence of the
majority of the members of’ the Dewan Rakyat.
The notion that the Prime Minister must always be the president of UMNO is, therefore,
plainly misinformed. The president of UMNO can only be appointed Prime Minister if
His Majesty forms the view that that president was likely to command the confidence of
the majority of the members of’ the Dewan Rakyat.
It is most important that this false notion be set right and set right immediately. No
doubt you will face tremendous opposition from your counterparts in UMNO when you
assert the correct, constitutional position as I have laid out above, but in this regard, I
must remind you that your oath of office as Members of Parliament behoves you to act
without fear and with one aim, that is, to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution.
I turn now to the more thorny matter of the second difficulty of perception I have
alluded to above : whether Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib is suitable for the office of
Prime Minister.

Allow me to put this matter differently.
Given the matters that I will shortly narrate below, can you, in all honesty, say that you
would have the fullest confidence in Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib as Prime Minister
of our country?
The matters that I ask you to take note of.
1. Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib has maintained that he neither knew, was ever
acquainted with nor had any dealings whatsoever with murdered Altantuya
Shaaribuu, the central figure in the ongoing murder trial in Shah Alam. Yet :
1.1 on 29th June, 2007, Mongolian national, Burmaa Oyunchimeg, a prosecution
witness in the abovementioned murder trial, testified that she had seen a
photograph of the victim, accused Razak Baginda and a government official.
Newspaper reports give the impression that both the prosecution and some of
the defence went to great lengths to try and not allow this witness to continue
with this line of testimony. However, when she was examined by Mr. Karpal
Singh, who finally managed to get leave to ask the witness who the government
official was, she replied, “Najib Razak. I remember the name Najib Razak
because the name Razak is the same. I thought maybe they were
brothers.”. Subsequently, when Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib was asked to
comment on this evidence, he declined to do so, on the grounds that it would be
inappropriate for him to comment further as any statement he made might be
deemed to be on a matter sub-judice, given that the trial was still ongoing. To
this date, Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib has never categorically denied this
piece of evidence. To the best of my knowledge, no effort has been made by the
authorities to investigate this piece of information.
1.2 On 3rd July, 2008, private investigator Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal publicly
disclosed his own statutory declaration made on 1st July, 2008 in which he gave
details that categorically pointed to Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib knowing
Altantuya very, very well. A careful analysis of the statutory declaration will
reveal that whilst details contained therein related also to the accused Razak
Baginda and the victim, amongst others, the most damaging details contained
therein related to Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib. The very next day, in the
most suspicious of circumstances, Balasubramaniam publicly disclosed a newer

statutory declaration made by him retracting the contents of his earlier statutory
declaration. Balasubramaniam and his family have since disappeared and have
not been seen by family and friends. A news report dated 10th July, 2008 has it
that Bukit Aman CID chief Mohd Bakri Zinin confirmed that a team of police
had taken a statement from Balasubramaniam in a “neighbouring country”,
declined to say which country he and his family were in but confirmed that
Balasubramaniam had said he left Malaysia because he feared for his life. Mohd
Bakri also confirmed then that police were investigating both of the
contradictory statutory declarations and asked for time to complete the
investigations. To-date, we have not heard on the outcome of those
investigations. Meanwhile, as reported in a media report on 15th July, 2008, the
nephew of Balasubramaniam, R Kumaresan, startlingly disclosed that whilst he
had been in contact with his uncle, he had declined to inform the police of
Balasubramaniam’s whereabouts when asked to do so by the police because
“I cannot reveal the full details to the police and by doing this I understand what
the consequences are… but if I do reveal everything I know what will happen to
them”.
2. On 26th June, 2007, another Mongolian national, Uuriintuya Gal-Orchir, who
testified at the murder trial, complained in the course of her testimony that local
immigration records of her, Altantuya and their friend Namiraa Gerelmaa’s entry
into Malaysia on 8th October, 2006 had mysteriously vanished. Lead prosecutor Tun
Abdul Majid Tun Hamzah and the defence lawyers protested that this evidence was
irrelevant. To the best of my knowledge, this matter of the disappearing immigration
records of Altantuya and her friends has never been investigated to verify if correct
and, if found to be correct, who might be responsible for the same and if it might
have a bearing on the murder trial.
3. Paragraph 52 of the first statutory declaration of Balasubramaniam details an sms
that was allegedly sent by Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib to Razak Baginda on the
day that the latter was arrested. The sms reads : “ I am seeing IGP at 11am today …
matter will be solved … be cool”. The correctness or otherwise of this sms is
presumably the subject of the police investigation referred to by Bukit Aman CID
chief Mohd Bakri Zinin. However, in another series of sms’es supposedly between
Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib and senior lawyer Muhd Shafee Abdullah, the
authenticity of which Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib has impliedly admitted, the
former sent the following sms to the latter on the morning of 16th November, 2006,
the very morning that Razak Baginda was charged in court in connection with the
murder of Altantuya : “Pls do not say anything to the press today. i will explain
later. RB will have to face a tentative charge but all is not lost”. These sms’es were
publicly disclosed on 11th October, 2008 with an immediate public outcry for an
investigation whether an abuse of power by an interference with the administration
of justice had occurred. On 14th October, 2008, Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib, in
reference to this series of sms’es, publicly denied that they evidenced any abuse of
power, without ever refuting the authenticity of the same. To-date, there has been no
public statement by the relevant authorities whether these sms’es are the subject of
any investigation to ascertain if indeed any abuse of power has occurred. If in fact an
investigation has been done, no results of the same have been announced.
Incidentally, even as write this letter, I have just received word that Razak Baginda
has been acquitted of the charge that Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib categorized
as ‘tentative’.
You will note that whilst there are many allegations of corruption and secret
commissions circulating, I have not sought to trouble you to take note of the same as, todate,
these appear to be without any factual or evidential basis. The matters listed above,
however, are all matters on record.
It may well be that the matters that I have raised above do not occasion any concern on
your part because you are privy to other information that fully vindicates Yang
Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib of any and all inferences and aspersions that might
reasonably be drawn or made from the matters abovestated. If so, then I must ask, for
the peace of mind of the great number who are now burdened with these concerns and,
so that an innocent man in the person of Yang Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib should not
have to unfairly suffer such inferences and aspersions, that you make public at the
soonest possible such other information as you may have.
However, if, like the rest of us, you too, are left to draw the same inferences and
aspersions that might reasonably be drawn or made by the rest of us from the matters
abovestated, I ask again how you and every other decent member of the Dewan Rakyat
might, in all good conscience, say that you have the fullest confidence in Yang
Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib to lead this country as Prime Minister? Would not every
man and woman in the Dewan Rakyat who has sworn to act in the best interests of this
country, be under an obligation to disclose to His Majesty that by reason of the matters

stated above remaining unsatisfactorily answered, you cannot lend your support to Yang
Berkhidmat Dato Seri Najib to lead this country as Prime Minister?
I fully understand and appreciate that the matter that I seek to bring to your attention
vide this letter is a difficult one. However, if these serious matters which relate to the
leadership of our country and which now greatly trouble the people are not to be taken
back to our political leaders, then I am truly at a loss as to who these grave concerns
should be taken to.
Finally, I am obliged to inform you that this letter will also be displayed on my blog. You
may wish to instruct your staff to note the sentiments of readers and commentators to
the same.
Your duties will no doubt afford you little time to respond to this letter. I shall be
grateful if you would give the matters and concerns raised herein your fullest attention
and to take such action as your conscience dictate.
I thank you for taking time out from your busy schedule to read this letter.
I am, as always, anak Bangsa Malaysia,
Haris Ibrahim

Setev Shariibuu’s tears in heaven: Altantuya to najib, razak baginda & malaysian justice system – Malaysiakini

Posted in politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

Altantuya’s father Setev left speechless

Posted in BN, politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

The picture says it all: Bewildered and dejected, Setev Shariibuu is speechless after the court decision this morning

Later, at a press conference, Shariibuu took out his passport and said that he was governed by Mongolia’s law. He did not explain what he actually meant.
Setev (centre), his interpreter Siizkhuu Sainbileg (Second Secretary, Embassy of Mongolia, Bangkok) (left) and the Mongolian consul based in KL (right) huddled together after the decision.

Setev was asked later if he would be taking the matter up with an international court. He replied through his interpretator that he had no comment.

Ainil Netto

Tangisan Altantuya: Razak Baginda bebas, bagaimana keyakinan rakyat pada sistem kehakiman?

Posted in BN, politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

KUALA LUMPUR, 31 OKTOBER (SK) – Walaupun Razak Baginda dibebaskan namun kes ini harus dilihat bagaimana penghakiman ini memberi kesan kepada rakyat Malaysia, kata Ahli Parlimen Balik Pulau, Yusmadi Yusoff.

Ketika dihubungi Suara Keadilan Online, Yusmadi berkata, terdapat beberapa kecurigaan yang berlaku sepanjang kes ini berlaku yang menjadi persoalan kepada rakyat negara ini.

“SAYA Berpendapat bahawa keputusan tersebut patut dihormati, tapi pada masa yang sama sejauh mana keputusan ini boleh memberi keyakinan rakyat kepada sistem jenayah dan sistem keadilan negara yang setakat ini dikritik hebat,” katanya.

Pagi ini Mahkamah Tinggi Shah Alam, Hakim Mohd Zaki Md Yasin membebaskan tertuduh ketiga kes pembunuhan berprofil tinggi, Abdul Razak Baginda degan alasan pihak pendakwa gagal membuktikan kes prima facie terhadap penganalisis politik berkenaan.

Mengulas mengenai keputusan bekenaan, bapa kepada mangsa bunuh, Dr Setev Shariibuu berkata beliau amat kecewa dengan keputusan mahkamah berkenaan yang bebaskan Razak.

Tambah Yusmadi yang juga peguam hak asasi, sesuatu penghakiman yang diputusan makamah mesti mempunyai nilai kepentingan awam, yang bermaksud pihak awak mampu melihat satu proses keadilan yang adil kepada kedua-dua pihak samaada tertuduh dan yang mendakwa.

“Saya rasa ini merupakan satu isu yang besar dan perlu dilihat oleh pemerintah dan pihak-pihak berwajib supaya keputusan  mahkamah yang diputuskan dinegara tidak dijadikan bahan ketawa apatah lagi tidak dapat pengiktirafan oleh rakyat dan masyarakt global,” katanya lagi.

Selain Razak yang dibebaskan, tertuduh pertama dan kedua, Azilah Hadri dan Sirul Azhar dikehendaki membela diri, hakim mengumumkan 10 November ini sebagai tarikh perbicaraan bela diri bagi mereka.

Mereka bertiga didakwa kerana membunuh seorang warga Mongolia, Altantuya Shariibuu. Mayat Altantuya telah diletupkan dan cebisan daging dan tulangnya ditemui bertaburan di kawasan Puncak Alam dan dipercayai diletupkan pada 19 Oktober 2006

Altantuya Tears in Heaven: Abdul Razak acquitted and discharged

Posted in BN, politics with tags on October 31, 2008 by ckchew

The Sun
SHAH ALAM (Oct 31, 2008): The High Court has acquitted and discharged political analyst Abdul Razak Baginda, 48, on a charge of abetting in the murder of his estranged Mongolian lover Altantuya Shaariibuu in a sensational trial that had hogged the limelight since middle of last year. Continue reading