25
Apr
17

1MDB ‘settlement’ with IPIC raises more questions

1MDB ‘settlement’ with IPIC raises more questions

1MDB has tried to paint a rosy picture of the settlement but IPIC statement indicates otherwise.

COMMENT

By Tony Pua

The 1MDB “settlement” with International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) is an affirmation by 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) that they have lost US$3.51 billion (RM15.4 billion) which has purportedly been paid to IPIC and its subsidiary, Aabar Investment PJS.

1MDB and IPIC have finally announced the conclusion of the much awaited “settlement” at the London arbitration proceedings filed by IPIC against 1MDB.

What is most interesting is that who the winner and loser is can be clearly deduced by their respective statements.

1MDB’s statement was short and sweet, providing scant details other than the fact that “1MDB will, among others, make certain payments to IPIC and will assume responsibility for all future interest and principal payments for two bonds issued by the 1MDB Group of companies due in 2022”. No figures are stated.

IPIC, on the other hand, made a detailed announcement to the London Stock Exchange, clearly stating that:

(i) IPIC will receive US$1.205 billion in two equal tranches on July 31, 2017 and Dec 31, 2017.

(ii) 1MDB and MoF Inc (Ministry of Finance Incorporated), will assume all responsibility of future interest and principal payments of US$3.5 billion worth of bonds, previously guaranteed by IPIC.

The implication between the two statements is staggering.

1MDB tried to paint a rosy picture of the settlement – that the dispute had been resolved with no hard details.

On the other hand, IPIC’s announcement clearly showed that they got exactly what they wanted, the return of US$1.205 billion worth of cash advances to 1MDB since June 2015 and to discharge itself entirely as a guarantor for 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion worth of bonds.

However, of greater significance is the fact that 1MDB’s concession to the above settlement terms is a direct affirmation and confirmation that 1MDB has lost US$3.51 billion worth of payments which have purportedly been paid to IPIC and its subsidiary, Aabar Investments PJS.

Last year, 1MDB and its CEO, Arul Kanda, informed the auditor-general (AG) and the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that the following payments were made to Aabar Investments PJS Limited, a separate company registered in the British Virgin Islands (“Aabar(BVI))”.

It is already widely known, and confirmed by the United States Department of Justice (US DOJ) that Aabar (BVI) is a fraudulent impostor company. However, 1MDB and Arul Kanda continued to insist that it is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the IPIC group.

As outlined on Page 92 of the PAC Report on 1MDB, 1MDB claimed it has paid Aabar (BVI) the amounts of:

(i) US$1.367 billion as a “security deposit” for the US$3.5 billion of bonds in 2012;

(ii) US$993 billion for the termination of options granted to IPIC or Aabar in November 2014; and,

(iii) Additional sums of US$855 million and US$295 million as “top-up security deposit” in September and December 2014 respectively.

These sums, as emphasised in the PAC Report, could not be verified by the AG as 1MDB has refused to provide the relevant proof and documentation of the transactions, despite repeated requests over months.

The question then is, if we have indeed paid the above sums, totalling US$3.51 billion to IPIC or its subsidiaries, why then are we allowing IPIC to relieve itself as ultimate guarantor for the bonds and why is MOF Inc assuming the US$3.5 billion liability?

Is 1MDB and Arul Kanda telling us that despite having paid US$3.51 billion to IPIC, we still owe the US$3.5 billion we borrowed?

Putting it simply, are Malaysians to fork out a whopping US$7.01 billion to settle 1MDB’s US$3.5 billion of bonds?

The only explanation for the incredulous situation is that the US$3.51 billion was never paid to IPIC as claimed. Instead, the funds were misappropriated or laundered as documented widely in the US DOJ charges against Jho Low and company, and Singapore’s prosecution of its local banking officers.

Therefore, we call upon the prime minister, who is also the finance minister, Najib Razak, to come clean on the discrepancy resulting from the “settlement” with IPIC since Malaysians have now to pay more than double what was actually borrowed by 1MDB.

…more
1MDB ‘settlement’ with IPIC raises more questions
April 25, 2017 – FMT

Advertisements

0 Responses to “1MDB ‘settlement’ with IPIC raises more questions”



  1. Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Nuclear lessons for Malaysia (Part 1) (Part 2)
BN govt is directing attention to distant past and distant future, in order to distract people from present misdeeds and poor governance
Felda - A picture is worth a thousand words
How the 1MDB Scandal Spread Across the World (WSJ)
We cannot afford ridiculously expensive RM55 Billion ECRL!
All that is necessary
for the triumph of evil
is for good men
to do nothing.

- Edmund Burke
When the people
fears their government,
there is TYRANNY;
when the government
fears the people,
there is LIBERTY.

- Thomas Jefferson
Do you hear the people sing?

Archives


%d bloggers like this: