Sarawak Report Raises Serious Questions Over MACC Whistleblower Deal and 1MDB Asset Recovery Negotiations

KUALA LUMPUR, Aug 16 — Critical governance and conflict-of-interest questions have surfaced over Malaysia’s efforts to recover missing 1MDB funds from Kuwait, following revelations by investigative portal Sarawak Report regarding a proposed whistleblower reward scheme involving high-ranking officials and defense counsel linked to former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

According to the report, key 1MDB whistleblower Bachar Kiwan was approached by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officials with a proposal to formalize his cooperation in tracing up to RM2 billion (KUD 160 million) in laundered sovereign assets. However, the arrangement raised major concerns after MACC negotiators reportedly urged Kiwan to replace his existing legal representation with Datuk Tania Scivetti of Scivetti & Associates—who is a member of Najib’s legal team and married to his lead defense advocate, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

The portal revealed that during a high-level meeting in Paris late last year, MACC officials presented Scivetti to Kiwan alongside a communications liaison who established an immediate video link with Law Minister Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said. Shortly thereafter, MACC Commissioner Tan Sri Azam Baki formally issued a letter confirming a “Cooperation Framework,” stating that “MACC appreciates your client’s willingness to assist in the recovery of Malaysia’s sovereign assets and looks forward to a constructive and professional engagement.”

The whistleblower process soon stalled over proposed financial arrangements. Proposed terms of engagement submitted by Scivetti & Associates outlined a “Success-Based Fee Structure” under which any official government whistleblower reward would be split, with 45 percent retained by the law firm, 45 percent paid to Kiwan, and 10 percent designated for his Paris legal team. With an initial sum of RM200 million (KUD 15 million) identified for repatriation from Kuwait, the fee structure would have yielded approximately RM50 million in legal success fees. Kiwan revealed he was advised that the substantial percentage was necessary because “a lot of people needed ‘looking after.'”

Addressing the motivation behind his cooperation, Kiwan told Sarawak Report, “To be clear, the bonus or reward has never been my motivation in this cooperation. What matters far more to me is recognition of the truth and compelling the Kuwaiti authorities to restore my dignity and honour – notably through the cancellation of the unjust judgments against me, and a fair resolution regarding my expropriation.”

Kiwan and his legal team ultimately refused to sign the fee structure after growing uneasy with the arrangement. Expressing his misgivings in a written message, Kiwan noted, “At this stage, we feel that the current working dynamic involving Tania, [and the other officials] is not providing enough clarity or comfort, particularly in terms of governance, accountability and outcome security. There seem to be too many grey areas, and the decision-making centre feels somewhat diluted.”

The negotiations unravelled further following the expiration of Azam Baki’s term as MACC Commissioner in May 2026 and subsequent internal reshuffles. On June 19, 2026, days after Sarawak Report submitted formal inquiries to Azalina, Azam, and Scivetti & Associates, the law firm issued a sudden termination letter withdrawing its proposal to represent Kiwan. None of the cited Malaysian authorities or legal representatives have responded to requests for comment.

The exposé highlights several central, unanswered questions surrounding the integrity of the state’s recovery process. Principal among them is why the MACC actively recommended legal representation tied directly to Najib’s defense team for a crucial 1MDB whistleblower. The report further questions the identity of the parties implied in claims that public reward monies were needed to “look after” undisclosed individuals. Crucially, the investigation asks why high-stakes whistleblower rewards were being structured through private fee-sharing proposals rather than transparent institutional channels, and whether Malaysia now risks forfeiting the recovery of up to RM2 billion in stolen public wealth due to the breakdown of these negotiations.

–NMT