Taxman cometh

Sacked former Police Director Commercial Criminal Investigation Dept Ramli Yusuff alleged that former IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan abused his power, when he was the Top Cop. Obviously Ramli is manipulating the opportunity to demonise Musa, at the juncture where Musa’s reputation is being perceived at its lowest ebb.

The Malaysian Insider story:

Musa too abused powers while IGP, says Ramli Yusuff

By Md Izwan
December 04, 2012

Musa had claimed that ministers and politicians interfered with police matters. — File pic

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 4 — Tan Sri Musa Hassan had abused his power while he was the Inspector-General of Police and colluded with the Attorney-General to escape from being arraigned in a 2006 criminal court case, his former colleague and rival in the force, Datuk Ramli Yusuff, has alleged.

The retired Commercial Crimes Investigation Department (CCID) director was responding to the ex-IGP’s bombshell at a new conference last week in which the latter had accused Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein as among ministers and politicians who had interfered with police matters.

“CCID once captured a criminal named Goh Cheng Poh @ Tengku Goh in December 2006. Tengku Goh made his affidavit and implicated Musa Hassan’s name.

“Then I handed it to the A-G’s office but it was never filed in court, resulting in the habeas corpus application by Tengku Goh being allowed and [he] was freed,” Ramli told The Malaysian Insider when contacted.

The retired police veteran has been a vocal critic of Musa and A-G Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, both whom he blames for putting him in the dock on a corruption charge in 2007, which several mainstream media had sensationalised as the case of the “RM27 million cop”.

“Instead, the A-G directed the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) to get confidential files regarding this case and hunted down informants to change their original testimonies,” said Ramli, who was once the nation’s third-most senior police officer.

Asked what proof he had to support his allegation, he said: “If what I say is not right, I am ready for Musa or Gani to take legal action against me. Berani kerana benar [bold as true].”

Ramli was at one time the nation’s third-most senior police officer.

Ramli also stood up for Musa’s successor, IGP Tan Sri Ismail Omar, and said the latter should be given the chance to prove his capability.

“The negative perception started during Musa Hassan’s term. Tan Sri Ismail Omar is making an effort to improve that image,” he said, referring to the endemic poor public confidence in the police force.

“To me, it is not just if Musa attacks relentlessly the IGP now.”

Ramli said that Musa’s criticism against the public institution the latter once led and the government was nothing new.

“He started becoming vocal and criticised the government when Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin announced his service would not be extended,” Ramli said, referring to the ex-IGP, and adding that it was the source of Musa’s disgruntlement.

Musa served as IGP for three years before retiring on September 13, 2010, after a corruption case that was closed in July 2007 for lack of evidence.

The nation’s former No. 1 watchman had last week described his working relationship with Hishammuddin as cordial, but the home minister did not see eye-to-eye with him on the command of the police force, saying that his refusal to indulge those who tried to interfere had likely been the reason why his tenure had not been extended.

The police force and other enforcement agencies fall under the home minister’s portfolio.

“When I found out that instructions were given to junior officers and OCPDs (Officer in Charge of Police District) without my knowledge, then something is wrong.

“So, I highlighted to him section 4(1) of the Police Act … command and control of the police force is by the IGP, not a minister.

“I talked to him nicely, he didn’t like it … that’s why (my tenure) was not extended,” Musa told a news conference last week organised by Malaysian Crime Watch Task Force (MyWatch), a crime watchdog which had claimed that it will “challenge any statistics that the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) comes out with”.

The organisation claimed that it has the “real” crime statistics from the police force which, it said, are “manipulated” before their release to the public.

MyWatch also claimed to have evidence of alleged links between high-ranking police officers and underworld kingpins.

It plans to release its revelations in stages, starting from next week, if the police continue to refuse working with it.

Musa also quoted section 4(1) of the Police Act, which states that police orders must only come from the IGP, who will be liable for such instructions.

He said that command and control over the police force should rest entirely on the IGP, adding that no other individual should be accorded the same right for the sake of checks and balances in the system.

Musa also took aim at his successor, Ismail, suggesting the latter was a yes-man who bowed to politicians’ influence.

**************

Ramli is a very interesting chap. He was charged in court for corruption. Read a compilation of articles written that should give a good over all big picture about who he really is and was.

As JUSA B ranking civil servant (Commissioner of Police, his last rank as the Director of CCID), amassed so much unexplained money. It was tried to justified that his accumulation of wealth derived from punting at the stock market ‘gambling den’. However, it does not make a lot of practical sense.

There is a reason why Ramli has been waiting for so long for an opportunity to crucify a straight arrow ramrod of an incorruptible Musa Hassan.

Ramli as a ‘three star’ Policeman

On 4 Sept 2007, Ramli declared as a JUSA B officer his and his wife, Anita Harun who is a Deputy Court Registrar, a combined gross monthly income is RM 18,134.60. It is believed that on the same date, Ramli filed a declaration that listed 52 assets, which include properties, bank accounts and shares of corporations. The value declared is believed to be slightly over RM 8 million.

This include RM 308,000.oo in various fixed deposits in Public Bank, another RM 200,000.oo in various fixed deposits in Maybank, a combined savings accounts of over RM 400,000.oo, an ASB account of RM 333,000.00 and several ‘undervalued assets’.

The ‘undervalued assets’ are believed to include several golf memberships which listed Tropicana, Monterez and Sutera Harbour. Others are a house in Bandar Utama valued at RM 187,000.00, a condominium at Pantai Panorama valued at RM 195,000.00, a detached house on an upmarket land plot in Damansara Indah valued at RM 840,000.00, a Condominium  in Saujana near Subang Airport valued at RM 360,000.00 and a condominium in Pavillion Residence valued at RM 1.1 million.

All these, could easily be valued now at  least RM 16  million. That is more prudent than the “RM 27 million”.

Then again, that guesswork on the current value of assets is just academic. What is fact, all these assets were valued at acquisition cost or price. What is interesting how could someone afford all these when his last gross income as a JUSA B civil servant  and wifey’s combined only at RM 18,000.00 per month?

Ramli and Anita, arriving in court

Even if he took typical mortgages, commercial loans and borrowings to pay for all these, the repayment would be a lot more than his monthly gross income. For the academic purposes, Ramli takes RM 6.5 million commercial loan and borrowings for all these assets acquisitions, which roughly is 80% of the acquisition cost. It means that monthly repayment should be in the neighbourhood RM 70,000.00. That is four times of their gross monthly income.

People who do retail commercial loans would understand that banks usually give a maximum of 40% of the a person’s or aggregated couple’s monthly gross income. It means that Ramli and missus should have only qualified for RM 700,000.00 worth of aggregated mortgages, loans and borrowings.

Someone who is paid RM 18,000.00 in gross monthly salary, would probably have a net income of RM 12,500.00. That would hardly suffice to cover a RM 900,000.00 mortgage, for a RM 1.1 million condominium in Pavilion Residences.

To qualify for RM 6.5 million borrowings, theoretically their gross monthly earnings should be in the neighbourhood of RM 180-200,000.00. That is RM 2-2.5 million a year. Probably that would also explain the cash for them to foot for their end of the 20% of the RM 8 million declared value of aggregated assets.

The “Thirteen Million Plus Ringgit” questions are:

1. Ramli’s and wife’s combined annual income is that amount?

2. How much income do the both of them have been declaring in their annual tax returns all these years?

3. Where are all these extra monies and income deriving from?

4. Since when are all are these extra monies and income derived?

It is time for the Inland Revenue Board audit the both of them. The Income Tax Act provides the DG of Inland Revenue to review all Ramli’s and wife’s accounts for the past 12 years. If its true that the both of them all the while had income channels that qualified them to amass all those said assets, then His Majesty’s Taxman should have a cut from this income.

This is as per provided under the Malaysian Income Tax Act (ITA). Like the maxim goes, “Only two certainties in life; death and taxes”.

IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan

IGP Tan Sri Musa Hassan

Let us play fair. Tan Sri Musa Hassan should be audited too. Then we shall know who is more likely could be proven living within their own means or otherwise, as civil servants of JUSA or Staff Officer equivalent. After all, Musa as a “Four Star’ Police Officer is just one or two grade above Ramli.

This would then be a picture substantiated with facts. Unlike Ramli’s letter as Director of CCID to then PM ‘Flip-Flop’ Abdullah about Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli who recklessly or with ill intent accumulated  RM 8 billion in losses for the national carrier when the latter was the Malaysia Airlines Chairman. Fact is that, Malaysia Airlines lost money because of the 97-98 Asian Financial Crisis and  most of it, due to forex exchange.

This is not withstanding that Ramli should also be investigated under the Anti Money Laundering Act (AMLA). As civil servants, Ramli and Anita could not have amassed and aggregated cash to the amount of RM 1.5 million in cash or other liquid derivatives in their 15 years of marriage. ‘Unexplained large amount of cash’ already warrants Ramli and Anita be investigated under AMLA.

Ramli was charged with abusing of power. He was never charged for corruption, ‘unexplained monies’ under AMLA or evasion of tax under ITA. It would not be far fetched to think that Ramli had had his hands involved in many ‘hanky panky’ deals. These are far more serious compared using a Police air unit aircraft to look at one’s land.

It is time to do the necessary detailed investigations, to the limit of the law.

Published in: on December 4, 2012 at 23:59  Comments (27)