.jpg)
KUALA LUMPUR – Authorities should get cracking in establishing the accuracy of Tim Leissner’s allegations of being blackmailed by former lover Datuk Rohana Rozhan into purchasing a US$10 million (RM42 million) London property, especially if it was bought with funds misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB).
Despite the former Goldman Sachs banker’s revelations coming from the witness dock of a federal court in Brooklyn, legal minds here were consistent that police, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, and especially the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) have enough basis to probe into Leissner’s testimony.
Even if the circumstances behind the supposed US$10 million London property for the former Astro Malaysia Holdings Bhd CEO appear as effects of personal fallouts, lawyers said the priority is to establish how Leissner paid for the house.
If what Leissner says is the truth, that asset which was purchased using 1MDB funds ought to be clawed back just like every other property, particularly so if Rohana had knowledge of where the funds were from,” Datuk Joshua Kevin Sathiaseelan told The Vibes.
Lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdullah said if Leissner did purchase the property to buy Rohana’s silence, it would have most likely been paid for with commissions earned through securing the 1MDB deal for Goldman Sachs.
“If that is indeed the case, that particular purchase of the London property was done through unlawful gains and through money laundering, so our authorities here should open up investigation papers,” he told The Vibes.
Haniff said two things must be established – Rohana’s supposed knowledge of 1MDB-related wrongdoings that drove her to demand the London property, and establishing the current status of the property with the aim of recouping it if it was purchased with illegal gains.
If it is true that Rohana blackmailed Tim Leissner to buy her that property in London in order to allow him to break up with her, that means as far back as 2013, whatever has been alleged and said with regard to Goldman Sachs and their dealings in Malaysia would be correct.”
Constitutional lawyer Fahri Azzat said if Leissner’s testimony is the truth, Rohana could be investigated under the Malaysian Penal Code for extortion, for the proceeds of which were used to buy the property.
On Malaysia possibly looking to seize the property, Fahri also underlined how the source of the funds used to purchase the home must first be established.
“I think given his (Leissner) evidence there, it points towards a commission of an offence by her. So, I would think they need to investigate that first.”
Fahri, along with Haniff, agreed that local enforcement agencies should look to interview Leissner and Rohana to ascertain the veracity of the former banker’s claims.
Leissner in his testimony as the prosecution’s star witness in Roger Ng’s corruption trial, made several controversial revelations over his involvement in the 1MDB saga, and some of his personal exploits including the extramarital affair with Rohana.
Leissner alleged that Rohana blackmailed him into purchasing the property for her before their breakup, and to buy her silence from snitching against the former banker’s involvement in 1MDB.
According to reports, the house could potentially be a property on Montpelier Street in London, the more affluent and expensive locales in England’s capital.
Cross-examination, AGC’s role
Haniff said despite Leissner’s scandalous and tabloid testimony, it would still have to be cross-examined by Ng’s defence lawyers.
“The quality of the evidence thus far may be affected or may not be affected upon the cross examination by the defence.”
Fahri said should Rohana decide to defend the accusations against her, she could through her lawyers, appeal to Ng and the defence team to include her as a defence witness.
“She could also come out with her side of the story to counter his narrative of events.
“However, she cannot sue Leissner for what he said at the trial because that is protected by privilege.”
Haniff then questioned if a representative from the AGC was assigned to attend the trial in the US to obtain necessary information first-hand.
He said it would be imperative for at least one representative, regardless if it was an appointed attorney or someone sent directly from the AGC, to attend the proceedings and at least hold watching briefs.
The AGC, he said, must come out to clear the air over its position on the trial and if it intends to initiate investigations into Leissner’s allegations.
“It is more about the interest of the people, the 1MDB scandal and recovering monies where necessary.
“Even if 1MDB losses is said to be around RM42 billion and this property is said to be worth RM45 million, it may not be much in comparison, but it is still a large amount of money that can be used for good purpose,” he added.
In the ongoing trial, Ng, 49, is facing accusations of pocketing millions of dollars in kickbacks in the 1MDB deal, with allegations of money laundering and violating anti-bribery laws.
Leissner is the prosecution’s star witness in Ng’s trial after he pleaded guilty in 2018 to a count of conspiracy to violate US anti-bribery laws and to conspiring to launder money. – The Vibes, February 25, 2022
