SHAMELESS AND SELFISH WORSENING STATE OF STATUTORY DECLARATION MADE IN THE NAME OF JUSTICE

Malaysia’s standard of STATUTORY DECLARATION has nose-dived into its lowest and most shameful.

Just as I did an article touching on the matter pertaining to the current health of this particular legal instrument called STATUTORY DECLARATION yesterday; it has now becoming a real malaria kind of diseases and TURNING the whole legal aspect of integrity of the said instrument and its system or act in place, in Malaysia, into SHAMEFUL SHAMELESS JOKES.

The makers or subscribers to the Statutory Declaration, the so-called advising lawyers (legal practitioners) and the politicians cum enforcers, and too does the one who simply stamped and signed the Statutory Declaration for the sake of ensuring any HEARSAY made possible for a mere price of RM5.00 (ONLY!); are to be blamed for this NEW CIRCUS IN TOWN. They have no absolute shame in making mockery out of what supposed to be a sacred, trusted and respected legal tendering document. They recklessly used every loopholes found in one particular instrument, to the best joy and thrill they could ever had. These irresponsible few POLITICAL ACTORS and FACILITATORS, have had no respect for millions suffering Malaysians whom they dragged into by holding the very essence of MALAYSIA LAW AND ORDER and more importantly TRUST, in the circus act of hanging those, upside down. These HERRINGS and PREDATORS portrayed themselves as ANGELS and CRUSADERS to cloud our fragile judgments and senses, into believing something which is actually nothing to begin with. At the end of the ‘not  so brightest’ day, they ‘the brightest of all’ would (most probably) got themselves well and handsomely paid with dollars and cents, while we keep on adding suffering into our already suffered livelihoods.

YESTERDAY, a person by the name Balsubramaniam a/l Perumal made a Statutory Declaration in the presence of the Crusaders Brigade which consisted of Malaysia Head of Opposition Force, DATO SERI ANWAR IBRAHIM, Anwar’s ‘knows about everything’ lawyer R. SIVARA, Balasubramaniam’s lawyer AMERICK SINGH SIDHU and a barrage of local and foreign journalist.

TODAY, less than 24 hours later, that same person (Balsubramaniam a/l Perumal) who made that solemnly declared Statutory Declaration yesterday, put every and each one Malaysian in NAKED AND DISBELIEF, WHEN HE, Balsubramaniam a/l Perumal, made a SUDDEN RETRACTS of part of his given Statutory Declaration under the pretext (or excuse) that he has BEEN FORCED and/or BEEN UNDER DURESS to come out with the earlier declared Statutory Declaration.

Has he been forced to come out with the earlier Statutory Declaration, mindless the contents which were much of a hearsay or been informed by things, rather than facts? On what ground did one has the capability to force him to do so? Didn’t he has any concern of what repercussion and consequence may be fallen onto him and million other Malaysians? Why the sudden retract then?

The on-going obsessive and abusive usages of Statutory Declaration as a tool to promote malicious intent (and maybe lies) and by ways of integrating HEARSAY as the core legalised part in such a Statutory Declaration is, has made Malaysia a laughing stock, not just among Malaysians but sadly too, to the visiting and concerning foreigners as well.

The accusers, subscribers, politicians and lawyers involved should stop and ponder upon the whole shenanigans for a while. What benefit does it bring to the already tainted legal and judiciary acumens and systems we had? And what pain-stopping remedy does it has to heal the current suffering of the 27mils Malaysians, which is getting worse by day? IF NONE, then we Malaysians simply have to just STOP buying all these cheap stunt and acting, ONCE AND FOR ALL. Or else, we shall all be gullible no less than we have been before.

And thanks to Balasubramaniam, he has proven it to be so SADLY but unbelievably TRUE.

BALASUBRAMANIAM THE PI RETRACTS HIS PROCLAIMED TRUTH AND KNOWLEDGE ON NAJIB

BALASUBRAMANIAM A/L PERUMAL dropped the second bombshell in less than 24 hours, after making his earlier Statutory Declaration, which was made then under the WATCHFUL EYES of his lawyer Americk Singh Sidhu, PKR leader Dato Seri Anwar Ibrahim and Anwar’s lawyer R. Sivarasa; this time CLAIMING that HE WAS FORCED TO MAKE HIS SHOCKING STATUTORY DECLARATION linking Najib to Altantuya.
(Read NSTP) and (Read Malaysiakini)

Below is the NEW Statutory Declaration made by Balasubramaniam retracting his dire and absolute knowledge of Deputy Prime Minister NAJIB TUN RAZAK’s involvement via ABDUL RAZAK BAGINDA.

But this portion extracted would help to conclude what Balasubramaniam earlier Statutory Declaration is all about.“ 4. I wish to RETRACT all the statements that I have made in paragraphs 8, 25, 28, 49 and 50 to 52 of my statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008. The statements contained in paragraphs 8, 25, 28, 49 and 50 to 52 of my statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008 ARE INACURATE AND NOT THE TRUTH. I wish to expressly state that:….”

So he LIED then. What is NEXT?

…………………………………………

STATUTORY DECLARATION

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force having joined as a constable in 1981. I was subsequently promoted to the rank of lance corporal and finally resigned from the Royal Malaysian Police Force in 1998.

2. I currently work as a freelance private investigator.

3. I wish to refer to the statutory declaration I affirmed on July 1, 2008. I refer specifically to paragraphs 8, 25, 28, 49 and 50 to 52, wherein I have stated inter-alia that:

a) Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was introduced to Altantuya Shaariibuu by a VIP;

b) Najib Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Altantuya Shaariibuu and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse;

c) Najib Razak instructed Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Altantuya Shaariibuu as he did not want her to harass him since he was the deputy prime minister;

d) Najib Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Altantuya Shaariibuu had met and all been together at a dinner in Paris;

e) Altantuya Shaariibuu wanted money in the sum of US$500,000 as a commission for a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris;

f) Altantuya Shaariibuu met Najib Razak in Singapore;

g) Altantuya Shaariibuu wanted me to arrange to see Najib Razak;

h) I told the police about the relationship between Najib Razak and Altantuya Shaariibuu but when it came to sign my statement this detail was left out;

i) The prosecutor during the course of the trial in the High Court of Shah Alam did not ask me any questions in respect of Altantuya Shaariibuu’s purported relationship with Najib Razak or of a phone call I received from one DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC to Najib Razak and/or his wife;

j) Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before he was arrested but did not receive a response; and

k) Najib Razak sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda on the day of his arrest to the effect that he was going to see the IGP that day and that the matter should be resolved and for Abdul Razak Baginda to remain calm.

4. I wish to retract all the statements that I have made in paragraphs 8, 25, 28, 49 and 50 to 52 of my statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008. The statements contained in paragraphs 8, 25, 28, 49 and 50 to 52 of my statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008 are inaccurate and not the truth. I wish to expressly state that:

a) At no material time did Abdul Razak Baginda inform me that he was introduced to Altantuya Shaariibuu by a VIP;

b) At no material time did Razak Baginda inform me that Najib Razak had a sexual relationship with Altantuya Shaariibuu and the she was susceptible to anal intercourse;

c) At no material time did Abdul Razak Baginda inform me that Najib Razak instructed Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Altantuya Shaariibuu as he did not want her to harass him since he was the deputy prime minister;

d) At no material time did Razak Baginda and/or Altantuya Shaariibuu inform me that Najib Razak, together with Abdul Razak Baginda and Altantuya Shaariibuu had met and all been together at a dinner in Paris;

e) At no material time did Altantuya Shaariibuu inform me that she wanted money in the sum of US$500,000 as a commission for a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris;

f) At no time whatsoever did Abdul Razak Baginda and/or Altantuya Shaariibuu inform me that Najib Razak met with Altantuya Shaariibuu in Singapore;

g) At no time whatsoever did Altantuya Shaariibuu inform me that she wanted me to arrange to see Najib Razak;

h) At no time did I tell the police during the course of their investigations about any relationship between Najib Razak and Altantuya Shaariibuu as no such relationship existed to my knowledge. Accordingly, the statement I signed before the police is complete;

i) At no time did Abdul Razak Baginda inform me that he had sent Najib Razak an SMS the evening before he was arrested; and

j) At no time did Abdul Razak Baginda inform me that Najib Razak had sent him an SMS on the day of his arrest to the effect that he was going to see the IGP that day and that the matter should be resolved and for Abdul Razak Baginda to remain calm.

5. In addition, I wish to retract the entire contents of my statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008. I was compelled to affirm the said statutory declaration dated July 1, 2008 under duress.

And I make this solemn declaration voluntarily and conscientiously believing the same to be true, and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declarations Act 1960.

Balasubramaniam a/l Perum

THE SORRY AND SAD STATE OF MALAYSIA'S STATUTORY DECLARATION AS LEGAL INSTRUMENT

Malaysians can go to sleep now, rest assured that they might not even need A COURT OF LAW anymore tomorrow, now that a NEW LEGAL INSTRUMENT has been found (at last) and overwhelmingly accepted as the best resort in sentencing and determining any involved-truths; which cost the SUBSCRIBER nothing more than a litre of the $2.70 priced petrol (for a 10 minutes trip) and a $5.00 more for the instrument to be WRITTEN, LOOKED-AT and ACKNOWLEDGED. And perhaps a cup of coffee spent after, for the witnessing ‘legally-aged smiling’ Malaysian, who acts as a WITNESS and who happens to be there and forgot to take his breakfast, hours before.

Well, for a cup of hot brewing coffee and maybe some cookies and if lucky, perhaps some cash to go by with; who WOULDN’T WANT to be a witness to the ‘who cares’ kind of written declarations.

Even better and best of all, that would put other more developed nations and its 100++ years old legal practises and trivia to DEFINITE SHAME, is the use of HEARSAY as the main entity and entry, core ingredients, un-denying and un-challenging fact, and legalised supporting factor to SUPPORT, APPROVE, ACCEPT and DEEMED the said instrument or statement as rationally and rightly made up of truth and nothing else but the truth.., and with the signatures in place... and a RM5.00 note exchanging hands plus the parting handshakes; all shall now be taken as the absolute tendering declaration of unshaken evidence of this someone is TELLING THE TRUTH, without the need to be sworn in the court of law and without the need for any legal judgement therefore. Infact, why would anyone needs an affidavit for, when the practicality and monetary cost of this said instrument is much simpler, cheaper and easier to produce.

I’m talking about an instrument called STATUTORY DECLARATION. But not just any other Statutory Declaration. It must be MADE IN MALAYSIA BY MALAYSIAN. And of course, for the use in Malaysia only. Because at other well informed and regulated countries, a Statutory Declaration based on HEARSAYS, RUMORS, GOD-GIVEN DREAMS etc will find its way INTO THE RUBBISH BIN.

While it tickles to look at such instrument is at used, the STUPIDITY actually come from the GENIUSES of some HOTSHOT MALAYSIAN POLITICALLY-MOTIVATED MAVERICKS, in finding ways to portray and make such a Statutory Declaration seen bigger, better, hotter, trustier and convincingly sexier than any of the produced Commonwealth’s format has been.

Even the glamorous and contentious Malaysia very own BAR COUNCIL would NOT DARE to issue out comments and explanations of this new-founded and dumb-founded instrument that looks NEVER like any Statutory Declaration they have ever come across throughout their years in practising laws. Anyone ‘who’s who’ nowadays is racing for a Statutory Declaration of their own. If that’s the case then, we should all be ready to embrace ourselves (and intelligent) for another round of upcoming HEARSAY made-for kind of Statutory Declarations from anyone Tom, Dick and Harry, all in the name of TRUTH and all for the sake of POLITICS.

As for you who are clueless and curious as to what I am saying and sketching out to, which means you are either not a Malaysian or just back from Mars; the details of Statutory Declaration at the bottom half of this article might help you to figure out what a Malaysian Made Statutory Declaration looks like, BUT might not help you to understand what my argumentative points were and had to do with these two controversial Statutory Declarations, one which dated on June 18, 2008 by Raja Petra Kamarudin (aka RPK). And another, which was the latest in circulations, by Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal.

This article is solely about the SORRY and SAD STATE of STATUTORY DECLARATION in Malaysia. BUT I will however, in my upcoming articles and at given opportunity, penned further into these two Statutory Declarations and of their related events, which I believed, most of you have known and heard of, louder than me.

NOTE: BE ADVISED. DOCUMENTS BELOW ARE FOR READING PURPOSES ONLY. THEY HAVEN'T PASSED THE QUALITY CONTROL PROCESS YET TO REALLY BUY ON IT.

………………………...(1)

STATUTORY DECLARATION

I, RAJA PETRA BIN RAJA KAMARUDIN (IC No: 500927-71-5257), a Malaysian citizen of legal age residing at No. 5, Jalan BRP 5/5, BuKit Rahman Putra, 47000 Sungai Buloh, Selangor Darul Ehsan, do solemnly and sincerely affirm and say as follows:-

1. I have been reliably informed that between about 10 p.m. on 19th October 2006 and early hours of the following day, the night Altantuya Shaariibuu was murdered, three (3) other people were also present at the scene of the crime;

(a) Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor, wife of the Deputy Prime Minister of Malaysia, Dato’ Seri Najib Tun Razak

(b) Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong (then Lt. Col.) a C4 expert

(c) Acting Colonel Aziz’s wife, Norhayati (one of Rosmah’s ADC)

2. My informer states that Acting Colonel Aziz Buyong was the person who placed the C4 on various parts of Altantuya’s body while being witnessed by Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor and Norhayati.

3. I make this Statutory Declaration because I have been reliably informed about the involvement of these three people who have thus far not been implicated in the murder nor called as witnesses by the prosecution in the on going trial at the Shah Alam High Court. I also make this Statutory Declaration because I am aware that it is a crime not to reveal evidence that may help the police in its investigation of the crime.

4. I have further been reliably informed that Prime Minister, Dato Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi has received a written report from the Military Intelligence confirming what I have revealed above and that the report was subsequently handed over to his son-in-law, Khairy Jamaluddin, for safe-keeping.

5. I have also been reliably informed that one of the Rulers has been briefed about this matter and His Highness is fully aware of what I have revealed above.

6. I have knowledge of who has informed me of this matter plus I have knowledge of the Ruler who has been briefed and is aware of the matter but I have agreed that I shall not reveal this information other than mention that the Prime Minister and his son-in-law have been handed a written report confirming what I have revealed.

7. The purpose of this Statutory Declaration is to urge all these parties who have been duly informed and have knowledge of this matter to come forward to reveal the truth so that the police are able to conduct a proper and thorough investigation into the murder of Altantuya Shaariibuu.

And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same to be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act, 1960.

SUBSCRIBED and SOLEMNLY DECLARED )
by the abovenamed RAJA PETRA BIN RAJA KAMARUDIN )
at Makhamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur )
this 18th day of June 2008 )

Before me,

…………………………………(2)

THE STATUTORY DECLARATION

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal (NRIC NO: xxxxxx-xx-6235) a Malaysian Citizen of full age and residing at xxxxx, Selangor do solemly and sincerely declare as follows :-

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force having jointed as a constable in 1981 attached to the Police Field Force. I was then promoted to the rank of lance Corporal and finally resigned from the Police Force in 1998 when I was with the Special Branch.

2. I have been working as a free lance Private Investigator since I left the Police Force.

3. Sometime in June or July 2006, I was employed by Abdul Razak Baginda for a period of 10 days to look after him at his office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang between the hours of 8.00 a.m. to 5.00 p.m each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2 ½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.
5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the 05-10-2006 as he had apparently received a harassing phone call from a Chinese man calling himself ASP Tan who had threatened him to pay his debts. I later found out this gentleman was in fact a private investigator called Ang who was employed by a Mongolian woman called Altantuya Shaaribuu.

6. Abdul Razak Baginda was concerned that a person by the name of Altantuya Shaaribuu, a Mongolian woman, was behind this threat and that she would be arriving in Malaysia very soon to try and contact him.

7. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that he was concerned by this as he had been advised that Altantuya Shaaribuu had been given some powers by a Mongolian ‘bomoh’ and that he could never look her in the face because of this.

8. When I enquired as to who this Mongolian woman was, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that she was a friend of his who had been introduced to him by a VIP and who asked him to look after her financially.

9. I advised him to lodge a police report concerning the threatening phone call he had received from the Chinese man known as ASP Tan but he refused to do so as he informed me there were some high profile people involved.

10. Abdul Razak Baginda further told me that Altantuya Shaaribuu was a great liar and good in convincing people. She was supposed to have been very demanding financially and that he had even financed a property for her in Mongolia.

11. Abdul Razak Baginda then let me listen to some voice messages on his handphone asking him to pay what was due otherwise he would be harmed and his daughter harassed.
12. I was therefore supposed to protect his daughter Rowena as well.

13. On the 09.10.2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30 a.m. informing me that Altantuya was in his office and he wanted me there immediately. As I was in the midst of a surveillance, I sent my assistant Suras to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office and I followed a little later. Suras managed to control the situation and had persuaded Altantuya and her two friends to leave the premises. However Altantuya left a note written on some Hotel Malaya note paper, in English, asking Abdul Razak Baginda to call her on her handphone (number given) and wrote down her room number as well.
14. Altantuya had introduced herself to Suras as ‘Aminah’ and had informed Suras she was there to see her boyfriend Abdul Razak Baginda.
15. These 3 Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12.00 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On the 11.10.2006, Aminah returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office on her own and gave me a note to pass to him, which I did. Abdul Razak Baginda showed me the note which basically asked him to call her urgently.

17. I suggested to Abdul Razak Baginda that perhaps it may be wise to arrange for Aminah to be arrested if she harassed him further, but he declined as he felt she would have to return to Mongolia as soon as her cash ran out.
18. In the meantime I had arranged for Suras to perform surveillance on Hotel Malaya to monitor the movements of these 3 Mongolian girls, but they recognized him. Apparently they become friends with Suras after that and he ended up spending a few nights in their hotel room.
19. When Abdul Razak Baginda discovered Suras was becoming close to Aminah he asked me to pull him out from Hotel Malaya.
20. On the 14.10.2006, Aminah turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights when I was not there. Abdul Razak Baginda called me on my handphone to inform me of this so I rushed back to his house. As I arrived, I noticed Aminah outside the front gates shouting “Razak, bastard, come out from the house”. I tried to calm her down but couldn’t so I called the police who arrived in 2 patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.
21. I followed the patrol cars to Brickfields police station in a taxi. I called Abdul Razak Baginda and his lawyer Dirren to lodge a police report but they refused.
22. When I was at the Brickfields police station, Aminah’s own Private Investigator, one Mr. Ang arrived and we had a discussion. I was told to deliver a demand to Abdul Razak Baginda for USD$500,000.00 and 3 tickets to Mongolia, apparently as commission owed to Aminah from a deal in Paris.

23. As Aminah had calmed down at this stage, a policewoman at the Brickfields police station advised me to leave and settle the matter amicably.

24. I duly informed Abdul Razak Baginda of the demands Aminah had made and told him I was disappointed that no one wanted to back me up in lodging a police report. We had a long discussion about the situation when I expressed a desire to pull out of this assignment.

25. During this discussion and in an attempt to persuade me to continue my employment with him, Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that :-
25.1 He had been introduced to Aminah by Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.
25.2 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.
25.3 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak wanted Abdul Razak Baginda to look after Aminah as he did not want her to harass him since he was now the Deputy Prime Minister.
25.4 Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.

25.5 Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a USD$500,000.00 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On the 19.10.2006, I arrived at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house in Damansara Heights to begin my night duty. I had parked my car outside as usual. I saw a yellow proton perdana taxi pass by with 3 ladies inside, one of whom was Aminah. The taxi did a U-turn and stopped in front of the house where these ladies rolled down the window and wished me ‘Happy Deepavali’. The taxi then left.

27. About 20 minutes later the taxi returned with only Aminah in it. She got out of the taxi and walked towards me and started talking to me. I sent an SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda informing him “Aminah was here”. I received an SMS from Razak instructing me “To delay her until my man comes”.
28. Whist I was talking to Aminah, she informed me of the following :-
28.1 That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.
28.2 That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at a dinner in Paris.
28.3 That she was promised a sum of USD$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a Submarine deal in Paris.
28.4 That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.
28.5 That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.
28.6That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.
28.7 That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak.

29. After talking to Aminah for about 15 minutes, a red proton aeroback arrived with a woman and two men. I now know the woman to be Lance Corporal Rohaniza and the men, Azilah Hadri and Sirul Azahar. They were all in plain clothes. Azilah walked towards me while the other two stayed in the car.

30. Azilah asked me whether the woman was Aminah and I said ‘Yes’. He then walked off and made a few calls on his handphone. After 10 minutes another vehicle, a blue proton saga, driven by a Malay man, passed by slowly. The drivers window had been wound down and the driver was looking at us.

31. Azilah then informed me they would be taking Aminah away. I informed Aminah they were arresting her. The other two persons then got out of the red proton and exchanged seats so that Lance Corporal Rohaniza and Aminah were in the back while the two men were in the front. They drove off and that is the last I ever saw of Aminah.

32. Abdul Razak Baginda was not at home when all this occurred.
33. After the 19.10.2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7.00 p.m. to 8.00 a.m. the next morning, as he had been receiving threatening text messages from a woman called ‘Amy’ who was apparently ‘Aminah’s’ cousin in Mongolia.

34. On the night of the 20.10.2006, both of Aminah’s girl friends turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house enquiring where Aminah was. I informed them she had been arrested the night before.

35. A couple of nights later, these two Mongolian girls, Mr. Ang and another Mongolian girl called ‘Amy’ turned up at Abdul Razak Baginda’s house looking for Aminah as they appeared to be convinced she was being held in the house.

36. A commotion began so I called the police who arrived shortly thereafter in a patrol car. Another patrol car arrived a short while later in which was the investigating officer from the Dang Wangi Police Station who was in charge of the missing persons report lodged by one of the Mongolians girls, I believe was Amy.

37. I called Abdul Razak Baginda who was at home to inform him of the events taking place at his front gate. He then called DSP Musa Safri and called me back informing me that Musa Safri would be calling handphone and I was to pass the phone to the Inspector from Dang Wangi Police Station.

38. I then received a call on my handphone from Musa Safri and duly handed the phone to the Dang Wangi Inspector. The conversation lasted 3 - 4 minutes after which he told the girls to disperse and to go to see him the next day.

39. On or about the 24.10.2006, Abdul Razak Baginda instructed me to accompany him to the Brickfields police station as he had been advised to lodge a police report about the harassment he was receiving from these Mongolian girls.

40. Before this, Amy had sent me an SMS informing me she was going to Thailand to lodge a report with the Mongolian consulate there regarding Aminah’s disappearance. Apparently she had sent the same SMS to Abdul Razak Baginda. This is why he told me he had been advised to lodge a police report.

41. Abdul Razak Baginda informed me that DPS Musa Safri had introduced him to one DSP Idris, the head of the Criminal division, Brickfields police station, and that Idris had referred him to ASP Tonny.

42. When Abdul Razak Baginda had lodged his police report at Brickfields police station, in front of ASP Tonny, he was asked to make a statement but he refused as he said he was leaving for overseas. He did however promise to prepare a statement and hand ASP Tonny a thumb drive. I know that this was not done as ASP Tonny told me.

43. However ASP Tonny asked me the next day to provide my statement instead and so I did.

44. I stopped working for Abdul Razak Baginda on the 26.10.2006 as this was the day he left for Hong Kong on his own.

45. In mid November 2006, I received a phone call from ASP Tonny from the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah asking me to see him regarding Aminah’s case. When I arrived there I was immediately arrested under S.506 of the Penal Code for Criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for 5 days. On the third day I was released on police bail.
47. At the end of November 2006, the D9 department of the IPK sent a detective to my house to escort me to the IPK Jalan Hang Tuah. When I arrived, I was told I was being arrested under S.302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for 7 days.

48. I was transported to Bukit Aman where I was interrogated and questioned about an SMS I had received from Abdul Razak Baginda on the 19.10.2006 which read “delay her until my man arrives”. They had apparently retrieved this message from Abdul Razak Baginda’s handphone.
49. They then proceeded to record my statement from 8.30 a.m. to 6.00 p.m. everyday for 7 consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak but when I came to sign my statement, these details had been left out.
50. I have given evidence in the trial of Azilah, Sirul and Abdul Razak Baginda at the Shah Alam High Court. The prosecutor did not ask me any questions in respect of Aminah’s relationship with Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Datuk Seri Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30 a.m. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Datuk Seri Najib Tun 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 7.30 a.m., Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows :- ” I am seeing IGP at 11.00 a.m. today …… matter will be solved … be cool”.

53. I have been made to understand that Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested the same morning at his office in the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang.

54. The purpose of this Statutory declaration is to :-
54.1 State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

54.2 Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the 3 accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.
54.3 Persuade the relevant authorities to reopen their investigations into this case immediately so that any fresh evidence may be presented to the Court prior to submissions at the end of the prosecutions case.

54.4 Emphasize the fact that having been a member of the Royal Malaysian Police Force for 17 years I am absolutely certain no police officer would shoot someone in the head and blow up their body without receiving specific instructions from their superiors first.
54.5. Express my concern that should the defence not be called in the said murder trial, the accused, Azilah and Sirul will not have to swear on oath and testify as to the instructions they received and from whom they were given.

55. And I make this solemn declaration conscientiously believing the same be true and by virtue of the provisions of the Statutory Declaration Act 1960.

SUBCRIBED and solemnly )

declared by the abovenamed )

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ]

this day of 2008 )
Before me,

…. Commissioner for Oath Kuala Lumpur