Has WSJ confirmed accusations of misappropriation against Najib?

Question

Accepted Answer

WSJ Has Not Directly Confirmed Accusations of Misappropriation Against Najib

Dow Jones & Company, the publisher of The Wall Street Journal (WSJ), has not directly confirmed that the WSJ has accused Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak of misappropriating funds. In a letter responding to Najib's lawyers, Dow Jones emphasized the WSJ's long-standing reputation for accurate reporting and stated its intention to maintain this standard in its coverage of the prime minister. However, the response focused on the factual basis of the WSJ's reporting rather than issuing a direct confirmation or denial of the specific accusation of misappropriation.
WSJ's Reporting on Fund Transfers

The WSJ published articles on July 2, 2015, and July 6, 2015, detailing allegations concerning US$700 million (RM2.6 billion) linked to 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB). Citing documents from Malaysian investigators, the WSJ reported that a money trail showed these funds were moved among government agencies, banks, and companies before allegedly ending up in Najib's accounts. The July 2 article specifically noted that the original source of the US$700 million remained unknown and that the money trail did not indicate how the funds were spent.
Najib's Lawyers Seek Clarification

In response to the WSJ's reports, Najib's lawyers sent a letter on July 8, 2015, to Dow Jones. They requested confirmation on whether the WSJ intended to accuse the prime minister of misappropriating US$700 million of 1MDB money. This letter was viewed as a potential precursor to further legal action against the newspaper.
Dow Jones Emphasizes Reporting Integrity

Dow Jones' counsel and chief compliance officer, Jason P. Conti, replied to Najib's lawyers, highlighting that The Wall Street Journal has upheld a "sterling reputation for fair and accurate reporting for more than 125 years." Conti assured that the WSJ had not deviated from this history in its coverage of Najib and did not intend to do so in the future. He indicated that the WSJ's reports were based on facts available to its writers, while also pointing out the limitations of the information presented in the July 2 article regarding the source and expenditure of the funds.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

Has WSJ confirmed accusations of misappropriation against Najib?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

2

0

0

Share with friends