What specific Aabar details were missed during due diligence?

Question

Accepted Answer

Specific Aabar Details Missed During Due Diligence

During the review of agreements between 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) subsidiaries and an entity presented as Aabar, several critical details concerning the legitimacy of the contracting party were overlooked. These oversights occurred despite the involvement of numerous financial and legal professionals. The discrepancies related to the incorporated entity's name, its place of incorporation, and the representation of its chief executive.
Discrepancies in Company Name and Incorporation

A key detail that was not identified during the due diligence process was the distinction in the company name. The agreements involved "Aabar Investments PJS Limited," which was incorporated in the British Virgin Islands. In contrast, the actual entity, Aabar Investments PJS, is based in Abu Dhabi and crucially, does not include the word "Limited" in its official name. This difference in nomenclature, while significant for corporate identification, was not flagged by the numerous advisors and lawyers examining the documents.
Misidentification of Company Address

Further details missed during the review pertained to the company's registered address. While the fake Aabar, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands, shared the same company address as the legitimate Abu Dhabi-based Aabar Investments PJS, this similarity did not raise immediate suspicion. The focus of the due diligence appeared to be more on the transactional aspects of the agreements, such as the mechanics of share options for a proposed listing of 1MDB energy assets, rather than a rigorous verification of the counterparty's identity and domicile.
Unquestioned Representation by Real CEO

Another significant oversight was the representation of the fake Aabar by the actual CEO of the Abu Dhabi-based Aabar Investments PJS, Mohamed Badawy Al-Husseiny. This dual role, where the CEO of a legitimate entity seemingly acted on behalf of a similarly named but distinct and fraudulent one, was not questioned during the review. The involvement of the real CEO, coupled with the shared address, may have contributed to the assumption that the contracting party was indeed the genuine Aabar Investments PJS.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What specific Aabar details were missed during due diligence?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends