PART 2: TABUNG HAJI, UJSB AND THE EIGHT-YEAR WAIT: WHEN WILL CMS COME HOME?
Remember Part One?
We followed the paper, we looked at Cahya Mata Sarawak (CMS), we looked at the investment thesis, we looked at the 2018 restructuring and now let's follow the asset.
Tuan-tuan dan puan-puan, this is where things get really interesting. Sitting with UJSB today are 52.0029 million CMSB shares, representing 4.84%.
That's not a rounding error. That's a serious block of shares.
And the question is not simply whether TH should get them back. The question is: When?
EIGHT YEARS IS A LONG TIME
In July 2026, Tabung Haji successfully reacquired its Tun Razak Exchange (TRX) land parcel and certain oil-palm plantation assets from UJSB. That was significant.
Why?
Because the assets had been transferred during the 2018 restructuring. It took years to bring them back. Almost eight years.
Eight years is long enough for a child to enter primary school and come out preparing for secondary school.
It's long enough for governments to change.
Ministers to change.
Markets to crash and recover and companies to transform.
So when TH says asset reacquisition is subject to commercial viability, I have no problem with that.
Actually, I think that's exactly how it should work but then comes the journalist in me.
What does “commercial viability” mean? What valuation? What discount? What return? What risk? Who decides? And what happens if the numbers don't make sense?
Because saying:
“We'll buy it back when commercially viable”... Dot, sounds very responsible.
But the real story is in the numbers behind that sentence.
AND WHAT ABOUT CMS?
Now bring CMS back into the picture, TH directly owns 61.79 million shares, UJSB holds another 52 million-plus shares and TH has already disposed of about 8.6 million shares in 2026.
So you've got one interesting situation: TH is selling part of its direct holding.
Meanwhile, another block of CMS shares remains within UJSB that naturally raises the question: Is TH ever going to buy those shares back?
And if yes: At what price?
If CMS becomes more valuable, buying it back could become more expensive. If CMS falls further, perhaps the acquisition becomes cheaper. But if the company performs poorly, why buy it back at all?
That's the commercial dilemma and that's why I don't think the public should be given slogans.
Show us the spreadsheet.
THE RCI DOESN'T END IN 2020
Then we have the Royal Commission of Inquiry. The declassified 252-page RCI report examined serious governance and investment concerns surrounding Tabung Haji, including the period between 2014 and 2020.
But here's the important part:
The story doesn't necessarily stop there. The forensic examination has now been extended into 2025/2026 that changes the game because suddenly we're not just looking backwards.
We're looking at what happened after the original crisis and looking at current portfolio decisions.
Current asset disposals, current valuations and current management decisions.
Including the 2026 disposal of CMS shares.
And that's exactly how an investigation should work.
You don't investigate yesterday's fire and then ignore the smoke coming out of the building today.
You check everything.
DON'T GIVE US ANOTHER “TRUST US”
I've heard this story too many times. Something happens. Questions are raised. An investigation begins. A report comes out.
Everyone says: “Lessons have been learned.”
Then life moves on. Until another scandal arrives.
Then everybody asks: “How did this happen?”
Again.And again. And again.
Enough! If the government says it wants transparency and reform, then transparency must mean something. Not just publishing a report. Not just holding a press conference.
Not just giving Malaysians another 252 pages to read. It means answering the uncomfortable questions.
Who decided? Why? Based on what numbers? Who benefited? Who carried the risk?
And ultimately: Did the depositors get value?
I'M YOUNG. BUT I'M NOT BLIND.
Maybe I'm still a young journalist. Maybe I don't have 30 years of experience. Maybe there are people in the financial world who know ten times more than I do.
Fine, teach me, show me the documents, show me the calculations and show me why the decisions made sense.
I'll listen : but don't expect me to shut up simply because the transaction is complicated.
I won't because journalism isn't supposed to make powerful people comfortable.
And if the numbers are good?
Show us.
PLUS and MINUS: The actual numbers stand at 53.64 million securities, a far cry from the 60-plus million often cited. But here is the real kicker: why is the Securities Commission still silent? Shouldn’t we have an independent body monitoring every investment move UJSB makes? After decades of the same auditor, perhaps an outside audit—someone other than EY—might actually inspire some faith.
If a basic search on the internet reveals shared board members and potential conflicts, why are the regulators playing the buat tak tahu card? As a journalist still finding my feet, I stand by one principle: kalau benar, berani tampil; kalau salah, jangan lindung. When billions in public funds are at stake, we deserve the full story, not just more excuses.
We follow the paper. We follow the money. We follow the decisions.
And if the answers are clean, excellent. If they're not… well, that's why journalists exist.
The paper trail doesn't lie. People do.
And sometimes...
The numbers talk louder than everyone in the room.
And yes, before you ask — what about the two brothers?
Oh, that story deserves its own chapter.
Two brothers. One empire. Plenty of money. And apparently, not enough room at the table for both of them.
I’m not going to spill the whole story here.
Not yet.
But let's just say this: when brothers start fighting over billions, it stops being a family argument and becomes a corporate war.
Stay tuned. There’s more coming.
Comments
Post a Comment