"Heist of the Century" figurehead emerges from the shadows

The highly anticipated interview of Noor Zuhair, a central figure in the notorious "Heist of the Century", sheds light on the staggering levels of corruption that permeate Iraq’s political and economic systems.

Last night, Zuhair made his first public appearance in an interview with Al-Sharqiya TV from Dubai, attempting to clear his name in a case that has gripped Iraq and exposed the extent of elite malfeasance. Zuhair, accused of orchestrating the theft of billions of dollars from the Taxes Commission account, denied any wrongdoing, claiming that the funds in question were not state-owned and that he did nothing illegal. However, his defense lacked conviction, and his statements pointed more to a web of systemic corruption than an isolated heist carried out by a lone mastermind.

Zuhair’s Defense and the Alleged Scheme

Zuhair’s main argument hinges on the assertion that the stolen funds were not public resources, but rather tax deposits belonging mostly to foreign oil companies. The Taxes Commission holds these funds as a form of security or advance payment against a taxpayer's future liabilities. The deposits are supposed to be refunded once tax obligations are cleared, but bureacratic red tape often means that these funds remain in the Taxes Commission’s account for years.

Zuhair claimed to have engaged in "check discounting," a common financial practice in which checks are sold to financial institutions at a discount for immediate cash. The financial institution, in this case, a currency trading company owned by Zuhair, purchases a check for less than its face value, essentially advancing cash to the seller, and then collects the full amount when the check clears. According to Zuhair, he bought dozens of checks issued in the names of these oil companies, ostensibly from their local representatives. If true, these transactions could potentially be verified by the companies involved, but so far, they have remained silent.

Zuhair’s insistence that his actions were entirely legal overlooks the fact that he would have had to orchestrate a highly sophisticated bribery operation to facilitate the transfer of funds.