Anwar Pathological Liar With No Proof Of Wealth Claims Mahathir

---

 


Ex-premier Dr Mahathir Mohamad dismissed Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim as a pathological liar who, over the past 25 years, has never provided evidence of the former ever abusing power to amass wealth.In his 60-page rebuttal against Anwar's statement of defence against his defamation suit, the former Langkawi MP pointed out that the defendant alluded to so-called documents as evidence but would give excuses when refusing to divulge the said proof.
The veteran politician pointed out that the Harapan chairperson's defence does not contain any proof, despite the defendant on April 7 being reported by the media as saying he is ready to furnish evidence to back his allegations against the plaintiff.
Mahathir claimed that this was contrary to Anwar's contention of the government bailing out KPB (now known as Pos Logistics Bhd), a company where the plaintiff's son Mirzan was a majority shareholder and director.
The defendant himself, as then deputy prime minister in March 1998, had told the media that it was not a bailout but was a 'business decision'.
Mahathir said Anwar, who was part of the former’s cabinet in the early and mid-1990s, had in Parliament in 1997 told MP Lim Guan Eng that Retirement Fund Incorporated’s (KWAP) sale of its shares in MISC Berhad to Petronas was not a bailout.
The former Umno strongman pointed out that his then protege told Dewan Rakyat that the deal showed the transparency of the then administration, which was not influenced by any family-owned businesses seeking government assistance.
"This clearly showed that the defendant has the traits of a pathological liar. This is because the defendant had a different stance (in the 1990s) than what was stated in his defence today.
"The same can be said with the defendant's refusal until today to furnish any proof to back his allegations.
"This shows that the defendant would say something and then change his stance while defaming as long as it fulfils the defendant's personal benefit," Mahathir said.
Muhammad Rafique Rashid AliClear facts
He said that as sitting premier, Anwar’s statements must always be backed by clear facts and truth as well as authenticated documentation due to his words being followed by the people in and outside Malaysia.
When reached out by Malaysiakini, Mahathir’s counsel Muhammad Rafique Rashid Ali, confirmed that the reply was filed at the High Court in Shah Alam via e-filing last night.
Mahathir is suing Anwar for defamation over allegations the former abused power to amass wealth during his first stint as prime minister (from the 1980s to the early 2000s).
In his defence filed on June 14, Anwar cited he was ready to prove allegations in court that Mahathir amassed wealth for personal riches while in power and that the plaintiff’s administration in the 1990s was tainted with cronyism and nepotism.
Besides the alleged bailout of KPB in the 1990s, the PKR president had also cited the RM214.2 million fibre-optic contract awarded to Opcom Cables Sdn Bhd, linked to Mahathir.
Anwar claimed that Mahathir’s family members were directors of Opcom Cables, including eldest son Mirzan (1994-2021), second son Mokhzani (2009-2019), third son Mukhriz (1994-2019), as well as Mukhriz’s wife Norzieta Zakaria (1995-2021).
Mahathir was the prime minister and finance minister when the contract was awarded.
Qualified bumiputera company
In his reply, Mahathir countered that Opcom was far ahead of other firms then as a Bumiputera company qualified to handle the contract.
The plaintiff contended that Opcom then had factories that received the MS ISO 9001: 2000 and MS ISO 14001: 2004 certifications showing it is a pioneer company in providing fibre optic cable in Malaysia.
He added that Anwar himself, as then minister officiated the company’s factories.
Mahathir pointed out that even Anwar, in his defence, conceded that Telekom Berhad then had by itself issued a letter to the finance ministry to hold direct negotiation with Opcom over the fibre optic contract.
Thus negating any claim of undue influence by the plaintiff, he said.
“Here, the plaintiff states that there is no abuse of power and/or any action by the plaintiff to “enrich the plaintiff’s children”.
“On the contrary, all business achievements of the plaintiff’s children were the result of their efforts and the merit of companies owned by them.
“The plaintiff’s children were not barred by law to carry out any business activity during the material time when the plaintiff was prime minister and/or finance minister.
“The defendant’s act of making presumptions and/or conclusions by himself should not be accepted by this honorable court, because as prime minister his statements must be based on facts and/or clear documentation,” Mahathir said.
Uplift Malays
Mahathir also rubbished Anwar’s claims that the former failed to uplift the Malays when in power.
He pointed out that the plaintiff’s administration in the 1980s to early 2000s had seen Malay students sent abroad for studies and increased Malay participation in investment vehicle Amanah Saham Bumiputera (ASB).
The plaintiff said his administration saw the upholding of the Bumiputera quota in public colleges and universities.
At the same time, it also saw the establishment of the national vehicle Proton to exposure the Malays to cutting-edge technology capable of competing with the best worldwide, among others.
Mahathir also rubbished Anwar’s contention that the former began harping on Malay rights after “losing power”.
He pointed out that Mahathir had always strived to highlight issues affecting the community via his Chedet blog and his book ‘The Malay Dilemma’.
The plaintiff pointed out that even during his second stint as prime minister between 2018 and 2020, he had attended the Kongres Maruah Melayu (Malay Dignity Congress), which sought to safeguard certain Malay rights. - Mkini

---