Malaysia Case Law: Decisions & Judgments

Topic

Predicate offence under s23 macc act

Legal area

Court

2 Sept 2021

WANITA MCA

Citation

W-05-68-02/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

W-05-68-02/2020 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

Appeal by Badan Perhubungan UMNO Negeri Pahang allowed because prosecution failed to rebut the appellant's uncontested affidavit evidence and failed to prove the predicate offence or nexus of seized funds to unlawful activity; appeals in the remaining eight matters dismissed and High Court decisions affirmed because prosecution failed to establish on the balance of probabilities that seized monies were traceable proceeds of the alleged predicate offence, many respondent accounts contained funds from other lawful sources or the impugned funds had been spent so that 'that property' was not avai…
2 Sept 2021

1. ) BADAN PERHUBUNGAN UMNO NEGERI KEDAH 2. ) Jamil Khir Bin Baharom 3. ) Othman Bin Aziz 4. ) Hashim Bin Jahaya 5. ) Abdul Azeez Bin Abdul Rahim

Citation

W-05-591-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)
Court

Court of Appeal
Case number

W-05-591-12/2019 (Mahkamah Rayuan)

The court held the prosecution failed to prove on the civil standard that the seized monies were traceably proceeds of the predicate offence (s23 MACC Act) or subject matter of money‑laundering under s4(1) AMLATFPUAA; where monies deposited by DSN had been spent or commingled with legitimate receipts, there was no identifiable property to forfeit under s56; bona fide recipients who received payments for value and had no reason to suspect illegality are protected under s61; s59 pecuniary penalties are not available absent successful forfeiture under s56/s55.

Malaysia Case Law

WANITA MCA

1. ) BADAN PERHUBUNGAN UMNO NEGERI KEDAH 2. ) Jamil Khir Bin Baharom 3. ) Othman Bin Aziz 4. ) Hashim Bin Jahaya 5. ) Abdul Azeez Bin Abdul Rahim