Abu Dhabi – Mubasher: The Abu Dhabi Sovereign Wealth Fund has sued Goldman Sachs over the 1MDB scandal on Wednesday, claiming that the US-based bank had used the fund to further a criminal scheme as part of Malaysia’s scandal-plagued 1MDB, according to AFP.

The suit was filed in a New York court on behalf of Abu Dhabi's International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC), the news agency said, noting that the lawsuit also included several Goldman Sachs officials who had also been charged by the US Justice Department earlier in November.

"This action seeks redress for a massive global conspiracy on the part of the defendants to defraud and injure plaintiffs," AFP reported, citing documents in the lawsuit, which also entailed the names of former executives in IPIC and its subsidiary Aabar Investments.

"As part of the scheme, Goldman Sachs conspired with others to bribe IPIC's and Aabar's former executives...to join the conspiracy and act against the interests of IPIC and Aabar," the Abu Dhabi fund stated.

Meanwhile, Goldman Sachs said it would fight the lawsuit, while a spokesperson for the bank told AFP, in an email, that Goldman Sachs was “in the process of assessing the details of allegations and fully expect to contest the claim vigorously."

On 1 November, the US Justice Department revealed indictments against two of the bank’s former executives who were charged as top players in the scandal surrounding Malaysia’s sovereign wealth fund 1MDB.

According to AFP, one of those former Goldman officials was Tim Leissner, who pleaded guilty and agreed to pay $43.7 million in restitution of ill-gotten gains.

In a bourse filing following the indictment, Goldman Sachs said that the Justice Department’s criminal documents had alleged that the bank’s “system of internal accounting controls could be easily circumvented and that the firm’s business culture, particularly in Southeast Asia, at times prioritised consummation of deals ahead of the proper operation of its compliance functions."

Goldman Sachs also said it was working closely with federal prosecutors and other authorities, but was “unable to predict the outcome" of the investigation, noting that a resolution could result in "significant fines, penalties and other sanctions against the firm."