PRESS RELEASE
The letter to WSJ from Najib’s Law Firm ,that’s got many ” Stumped in a Bewildered or Downright Amused way .
For the “Multi-Speak” causing readers to do a “Double Take “Effect –
A type of “Scratch Head – “Huh…? What Does That really MEAN??” situation –
They are Highlighted in Bold Letters.
And You thought that only Politicians do this sort of thing. !
Spewing statements that no one knows for sure what it means!
——————————————————————————————–
A Wall street Journal had published an article dated 3rd July 2015, implicating our client Datuk Seri Najib.
Immediately, our client had instructed us, Messrs Hafarizam Wan & Aisha Mubarak to scrutinize the said article.
.The article is tainted with numerous allegations against our client
.which involved several companies and transactions.
.Combing through the said article, we have concluded that the language is intentionally or otherwise has made reference to several facts and companies which are vaguely described.
.Reference is made to the said article wherein it has been stated that our client had been directly probed into 1MDB,
.However contents of the article refers to indirect transactions
where our client has been implicated with 1MDB-linked companies.
.A clear contradiction which requires further clarification.
.This article by WSJ was issued, published and circulated through WSJ web portal .
.Firstly, we have been instructed to identify the parties involved in the authorship, distribution and publishing,
.for the purpose of naming the appropriate parties in any
.potential actions which requires deliberation and research
as the article
” does not reflect extensive details for service of any legal letter or court documents.”
Secondly, another issue of concern is, jurisdictional issues of which the publication originates from United States of
.America and accessible worldwide. We have been also instructed that.
a local presence of WSJ is also available and we are pursuing further clarification and details on this matter.
.Since the article involves several parties, we have also been instructed to consider a joint action
.or an action against, in the event evidence shows a conspiracy against our client.
.Kindly note that the companies named as conspirators with our client, in the article are; International Petroleum Investment Co, Tanore Finance Corp, SRC International Sdn. Bhd, and Ihsan Perdana Sdn. Bhd.
.Several names of companies or organizations had only been referred to as the related companies or companies
.belonging to certain organizations or companies, and also the sources or destinations or the alleged transactions has not been disclosed.
This in itself -either intentionally or otherwise- has caused further identification of facts been required.
Once we have identified the parties, the jurisdiction, and the involvement of conspirators or are they merely parties which also had been innocently imputed in the article, we can then proceed to address the third issue.
.
.The third issue is to tackle all possible or plausible legal remedies of which our client shall be given advise on an
.action of defamation, further tortuous actions and remedies including any statutory violations by WSJ and related companies and (if any) conspirers.
.This is not a straightforward legal action due to the national and international imputations.
.We have been instructed to identify facts and lay full facts, before our client, is able to proceed with further instructions.
.The purpose of clear explanation is to avoid unnecessary objections by WSJ
.on the imputations that are made.
.Once our client has obtained all necessary facts and the position of WSJ is ascertained,
.we have strict instructions to immediately exhaust legal avenues and remedies.
.Yours faithfully,
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF MESSRS HAFARIZAM WAN & AISHA MUBARAK
WAN AZMIR BIN WAN MAJID
***************************************************
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS, DOW JONES & COMPANY, INC
ARTICLES WRITTEN BY SIMON CLARK AND TOM WRIGHT IN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL CONCERNING YAB DATO’ SRI MOHD NAJIB BIN TUN HAJI ABDUL RAZAK ENTITLED “MALAYSIA LEADER’S ACCOUNTS PROBED” PUBLISHED ON 2ND JULY 2015 AND “SCANDAL IN MALAYSIA” PUBLISHED ON 6TH JULY 2015 (“ THE ARTICLES”)
We act for the Right Honourable Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Tun Haji Abdul Razak, the Prime Minister of Malaysia, in his personal capacity.
We refer to the Articles dated 2nd July 2015 and 6th July 2015 in your Wall Street Journal which, we state, contains a
.plethora of convoluted, scurrilous and vague allegations against our client.
.In the circumstances, we are instructed by our Client
to seek confirmation as to whether it is your position as taken in the Articles that our Client misappropriated
nearly USD 700 million from 1Malaysia Development Berhad?
We are instructed to procure your position because the Articles collectively suggest that you are unsure of “the original
.source of the money and what happened to the money” whilst on the other hand, the general gist of the Articles create
.a clear impression that our Client has misappropriated about USD 700 million belonging to 1Malaysia Development Berhad.
In the circumstance and in the interests of our Client, we would expect a Newspaper of your international standing and
.reputation to
state unequivocally and with clarity as to whether it is your contention that our Client
misappropriated about USD 700 million belonging to 1Malaysia Development Berhad.
You will no doubt appreciate the seriousness of the allegations made against our Client in the said Articles and this
confirmation is sought to enable us to advise our Client on the appropriate legal recourse he can take to seek
redress in relation to the publication of these Articles.
We demand a reply within fourteen (14) days of the date hereof and please let us know whether you have
appointed solicitors in Malaysia to accept service of legal proceedings on your behalf and on behalf of the
reporters who wrote the Articles- in the event – that legal proceeding become necessary.
We hereby reserve all our Client’s rights in this matter.
FOR AND ON BEHALF OF MESSRS HAFARIZAM WAN & AISHA MUBARAK
.potential actions which requires deliberation and research as the article
” does not reflect extensive details for service of any legal letter or court documents.”
We want to Sue but We do not have enough Grounds and a Weak Case that may get thrown out of any Court room.
misappropriated about USD 700 million.:
Are you accusing our Client of Corruption or not ? Be Clear and Specific! So that We can Sue for Defamation if you are.!
—————————————————————————————————————————
We demand a reply :
We are Demanding but whether you Comply or Nor is Another Matter thats up to You!!
—————————————————————————————————————————
appointed solicitors in Malaysia – to accept service of legal proceedings :
We want to Sue You and Get the Lawsuit proceedings on our Home Turf!
And I say Good Luck to Them!
—————————————————————————————————————————
in the event that legal proceeding become necessary:
We may not Sue after-all , If we think we cannot put a case together.It will be highly embarassing!
No Guarantees in a Court of Law.Horrors ! What if We Lose ? Our Client may get incriminated with Criminal behaviour and answer to the Law.
—————————————————————————————————————————
Rambling Thots - Opinion Matters.! 
Leave a comment