Friday, March 15, 2013

Private investigator Balasubramaniam's last interview

Uploaded 12 March 2013, three days before Bala died of an apparent heart attack at his home in Rawang. As a gesture of respect for the man's courage in confronting power with truth, I reproduce below his sensational statutory declaration of 3 July 2008...


(Courtesy of, 3 July 2008)

Malaysiakini | Jul 3, 08 | 2:01pm

The following is the full 16-page statutory declaration signed by Abdul Razak Baginda's private investigor P. Balasubramaniam on July 1 2008.

I, Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal ... do solemly and sincerely declare as follows:

1. I have been a police officer with the Royal Malaysian Police Force, having joined 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 freelance 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 8am to 5pm each working day as apparently he was experiencing disturbances from a third party.

4. I resigned from this job after 2½ days as I was not receiving any proper instructions.

5. I was however re-employed by Abdul Razak Baginda on the Oct 5, 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 Oct 9, 2006 I received a phone call from Abdul Razak Baginda at about 9.30am 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 notepaper, 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 three Mongolian girls however returned to Abdul Razak Baginda’s office at the Bangunan Getah Asli, Jalan Ampang again, the next day at about 12 noon. They did not enter the building but again informed Suras that they wanted to meet Aminah’s boyfriend, Abdul Razak Baginda.

16. On Oct 11, 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 three Mongolian girls, but they recognised 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 Oct 14, 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 two patrol cars. I explained the situation to the police, who took her away to the Brickfields police station.

(Photo courtesy of The Courtroom Stomp}
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 US$500,000 and three 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:

i) He had been introduced to Aminah by Najib Razak at a diamond exhibition in Singapore.

ii) Najib Razak informed Abdul Razak Baginda that he had a sexual relationship with Aminah and that she was susceptible to anal intercourse.

iii) Najib 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.

iv) Najib Razak, Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had all been together at a dinner in Paris.

v) Aminah wanted money from him as she felt she was entitled to a US$500,000 commission on a submarine deal she assisted with in Paris.

26. On Oct 19, 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 three 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:

i) That she met Abdul Razak Baginda in Singapore with Najib Razak.

ii) That she had also met Abdul Razak Baginda and Najib Razak at a dinner in Paris.

iii) That she was promised a sum of US$500,000.00 as commission for assisting in a submarine deal in Paris.

iv) That Abdul Razak Baginda had bought her a house in Mongolia but her brother had refinanced it and she needed money to redeem it.

v) That her mother was ill and she needed money to pay for her treatment.

vi) That Abdul Razak Baginda had married her in Korea as her mother is Korean whilst her father was a Mongolian/Chinese mix.

vii) That if I wouldn’t allow her to see Abdul Razak Baginda, would I be able to arrange for her to see Najib 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 plainclothes. 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 Oct 19, 2006, I continued to work for Abdul Razak Baginda at his house in Damansara Heights from 7pm to 8am 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 Oct 20, 2006, both of Aminah’s girlfriends 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 my handphone and that 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 Oct 24, 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 thumbdrive. 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 Oct 26, 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 Section 506 of the Penal Code for criminal intimidation.

46. I was then placed in the lock up and remanded for five 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 Section 302 of the Penal Code for murder. I was put in the lock up and remanded for seven 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 Oct 19, 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 am to 6pm everyday for seven consecutive days. I told them all I knew including everything Abdul Razak Baginda and Aminah had told me about their relationships with Najib 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 Najib Razak or of the phone call I received from DSP Musa Safri, whom I believe was the ADC for Najib Razak and/or his wife.

51. On the day Abdul Razak Baginda was arrested, I was with him at his lawyers office at 6.30am. Abdul Razak Baginda informed us that he had sent Najib 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 7.30am, Abdul Razak Baginda received an SMS from Najib Razak and showed, this message to both myself and his lawyer. This message read as follows: “I am seeing IGP at 11am 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:

i) State my disappointment at the standard of investigations conducted by the authorities into the circumstances surrounding the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

ii) Bring to the notice of the relevant authorities the strong possibility that there are individuals other than the three accused who must have played a role in the murder of Altantuya Shaaribuu.

iii) 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.

iv) Emphasise 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.

v) 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.

Balasubramaniam a/l Perumal
July 1, 2008


Anonymous said...

DATUK YIP Kum FOOK, MCA PENGERUSI GOMBAK menghina dan ANTI Sami-Sami Buddha.

Dengan berhormati penganut ke dalam Dhamma,

Saya ikhlas hendaklah menggunakan bahasa secara terbuka pengalaman pahit yang sebenarnya telah berlaku di PERSATUAN PENGANUT BUDDHA SAMNAK SAMBODHI NO: 19-21 JALAN 38 TAMAN DESA JAYA KEPONG 52100 KUALA LUMPUR, MALAYSIA.

Saya tidak berpuas hati dengan Pengerusi MCA Bahagian Gombak (Yip Kum Fook) dan Pengerusi PERSATUAN PENGANUT BUDDHA SAMNAK SAMBODHI (Yip Kum Fook) kerana dia menggunakan cara yang ganas dan sombong dalam membawa masuk sekumpulan individu dari tempat-tempat lain untuk memprovokasi dan memijak sucidarat dan tanpa apa-apa sebab bunyi yang dipanggil polis untuk menahan Sami apabila bertentangan untuk mengaibkan penyembah Buddhisme.

Saya amat ingin bertanya di sini bahawa apa dosa besar dan jenayah telah dia telah melakukan setakat anda peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook dengan cara atau oleh penjahat yang dipanggil polis untuk menahan seorang rahib yang seperti dia?

Saya datang dari Pulau Pinang, saya adalah pendatang baru dan saya sementara meletakkan di PERSATUAN PENGANUT BUDDHA SAMNAK SAMBODHI untuk mengkaji dan belajar untuk mempraktikkan Buddhisme. Ketika di kuil tersebut, saya tidak tahan dengan cara yang peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook berkelakuan, sikap anda tidak sopan, sombong dan tidak terkalahkan dalam merawat ketua Sami di Kuil.

Kerana saya berkata beberapa perkataan mengenai kelakuan anda kepada anda peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook, anda menggunakan cara-cara kotor untuk menyakiti Sami. Ia adalah sesuatu yang tidak boleh diterima dan membuang satu contoh yang sangat buruk.

Untuk pengetua sebuah sekolah, jika pelajar itu dan telah melakukan suatu kesalahan, pihak polis mestilah sebagai perkara ihsan bertemu dengan pengetua, cuba untuk memahami situasi sebenar, sebelum polis mengambil sebarang tindakan. Ini adalah amalan biasa.

Tetapi ia memohon maaf untuk mengatakan, bahawa peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook yang dirinya adalah seorang peguam memilih untuk mempunyai dilakukan. Jika tidak, dia tidak bertindak selaras dengan ajaran Agama Buddha dan memandang rendah kepada semangat Buddhisme untuk satu tujuan, menunjukkan bahawa dia adalah pengerusi yang kuat Bahagian MCA Gombak dan pengerusi PERSATUAN PENGANUT BUDDHA SAMNAK SAMBODHI. Beliau menuntut pihak polis untuk menahan Sami Buddha untuk merealisasikan motif beliau

Ia amat bertuah yang disebabkan oleh hakikat bahawa agama itu sendiri adalah satu perkara yang sensitif, malah anggota polis Melayu difahami dan dihormati agama, budaya dan adat resam kaum lain, jadi mereka tidak terburu-buru mengambil apa-apa tindakan. Jika tidak, akibatnya akan menjadi bencana.

Anonymous said...

Saya faham mengapa peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook amat marah dan juga turut bertambah. Sebab utama adalah seperti berikut. Ketua Sami PERSATUAN PENGANUT BUDDHA SAMNAK SAMBODHI. Beliau telah Ketua Sami selama 20 tahun. Beliau adalah arkitek dan memainkan penting dalam meningkatkan dana awam untuk membina Kuil Buddha.

Ketua Sami itu cemas untuk mengetahui bahawa seseorang yang baru seperti dia peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook; pengerusi MCA Bahagian Gombak tidak berjalan di bercakap. Bercakap beliau yang indah dihiasi dengan kemanusiaan, menurut dan moral.

Tetapi dalam amalan, beliau sentiasa dipinggirkan dan ditolak keluar orang-orang yang melihat mata ke mata dengan dia. Jawatankuasa Kuil sebaliknya membuat kebanyakannya saudaranya. Selain itu, dana Kuil Buddha tidak diuruskan secara telus. Akhirnya, motif sebenar beliau ialah untuk menghidupkan tanah yang tulen dan suci menjadi batu loncatan politik dan alasan politik dan dari tempat ibadat menjadi harta peribadi.

Ketua Sami amat menyedari apa yang telah diambil diletakkan, tetapi untuk mencari memelihara kesejahteraan keseluruhan kuil, dia memberinya nasihat Yip Kum Fook peguam berniat baik. Tetapi nasihat sedemikian telah tidak diterima dengan baik, ia dibuat peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook tidak berpuas hati, resah dan berlari liar. Bukannya mengendahkan nasihat itu, dia menggunakan setiap peluang untuk mencipta masalah dan untuk menganiaya Ketua Sami dan Sami-Sami supaya mereka tidak lagi boleh tinggal dan meninggalkan kuil Buddha.

peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook dan pengerusi Bahagian Gombak MCA yang penjahat, reka bentuk adalah jelas dan yang gaya adalah hipokrit dikenali oleh semua orang ... kata-kata manis anda boleh menipu dan mengelirukan beberapa orang beberapa masa, tetapi anda tidak boleh lakukan ia pada setiap masa. Nasib karma atau takdir agama Buddha pasti akan menimpa.

Sebagai perkataan terakhir saya, saya ingin mengambil kesempatan ini untuk memberkati dia, boleh peguam Datuk Yip Kum Fook bangun dengan realiti, bertaubat sebelum terlambat. Melakukan apa yang baik, menumpahkan jahat.

Anonymous said...

Dear everyone,
Careful of YIP KUM FOOK (MCA GOMBAK) because this man is cheating and disturbing of many people’s wives, and also cheating of Buddhist Temple (SAMNAK SAMBODHI)’s money.
Recently, many people know in what he”yip” did, please stay far from him. He is lawyer, Datuk, MCA Chairman and etc. or everyone can research at Website “YIP KUM FOOK”
Loh Guan Lye
Taman Desa Jaya, Kepong, Kuala Lumpur

Unknown said...

This is good post .This Careful of YIP KUM FOOK (MCA GOMBAK) because this man is cheating and disturbing like it.


Orlando Private Investigator

Christina Porter said...

The first thing you should ask a private investigator is to see a PI license. You can go online and see if the number is actually valid. Manchester private investigators