Latest news with #AMLA
Sinar Daily
4 days ago
- Business
- Sinar Daily
Businesses engaged in foreign transactions must exercise heightened diligence under AMLA
Companies operating in high-risk sectors such as maritime, petroleum and logistics, which frequently conduct foreign exchange transactions, must exercise heightened diligence in documenting their operations. 05 Jun 2025 06:09pm Pix for illustration purpose only. - FILE PIX KUALA LUMPUR - Malaysian business owners engaged in international transactions are advised to maintain comprehensive records and promptly report any suspicious activity to Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) to ensure compliance with the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001(AMLA). Lawyer Guok Ngek Seong, who has nearly 25 years of experience in civil and criminal litigation, told Bernama that companies operating in high-risk sectors such as maritime, petroleum and logistics, which frequently conduct foreign exchange transactions, must exercise heightened diligence in documenting their operations. BNM has the authority to conduct annual checks on such entities to ensure compliance with AMLA regulations. He was speaking on the matter in light of recent actions taken by BNM, which imposed administrative monetary penalties amounting to RM4.95 million on several financial institutions for breaches of statutory and regulatory obligations. The penalties involved non-compliance with provisions under the Development Financial Institutions Act 2002 as well as failures to adhere to requirements under the Anti-Money Laundering, Countering Financing of Terrorism and Targeted Financial Sanctions for Financial Institutions Policy Document. These regulatory actions reflect the heightened scrutiny placed on financial and corporate entities, reinforcing the need for robust compliance measures, especially in sectors exposed to cross-border transactions. Guok stressed that proper record-keeping may constitute a key line of defence should a company come under investigation for alleged money laundering or involvement in unlawful activities. "BNM has the authority to conduct annual checks on such entities to ensure compliance with AMLA regulations,' he said. When asked whether litigants may obtain court orders through pre-action discovery or the Norwich Pharmacal process, Guok explained that such orders are available to parties seeking disclosure from individuals or entities not directly involved in the anticipated proceedings. He noted that Norwich Pharmacal orders permit a litigant to compel a third party, who is not itself implicated in the alleged wrongdoing but is mixed up in it innocently, to disclose information necessary to identify or pursue the actual wrongdoer. "However, the court must balance such applications to prevent any form of abuse or 'fishing expeditions', particularly in light of, among other considerations, the principle of banker-client privilege. "It is sometimes crucial for clients to obtain documents from banks, especially in cases where suspicious transactions have been traced to accounts held by corporations later found to be involved in fraudulent activities,' he said. He said the only viable means for victims to substantiate such transactions is by obtaining the relevant documentation, which may be instrumental in identifying the mechanisms or systems employed to facilitate the fraudulent activity. Commenting on the Bankers' Books (Evidence) Act 1949 (BBEA), Guok noted that while Section 6 restricts the compellability of bank officers to produce bankers' books where the bank is not a party to the proceedings, the court nonetheless retains the discretion to issue such an order where appropriate. "The court must balance the interests of banker-client confidentiality against the issues in the particular suit before making appropriate orders. "While some discovery applications may be deemed an abuse of process, others are genuine, especially when litigants require documents from banks to trace the money trail in their cases,' he added. - BERNAMA international transactions
Business Recorder
6 days ago
- Automotive
- Business Recorder
AMLA: minister says FBR powers to be reviewed
ISLAMABAD: Finance Minister Muhammad Aurangzeb said Saturday that the issuance of notices to the business community under Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) is a very serious matter and the government would review AML powers available to the Federal Board of Revenue (FBR). During review of the Finance Bill (2025-26) at the Senate Standing Committee on Finance on Saturday, Chairman of the committee Senator Salim Mandviwala took up the issue of AML notices to the taxpayers by the FBR. The issue came to the light when FBR Member Customs (Policy) explained creation of proposed Directorate General of Intelligence and Risk Management Customs under the Finance Bill 2025-26. The proposed Directorate would have the powers to exercise under the AML Act. FBR makes first major 'Benami Property' seizure in Islamabad, vows to expand crackdown Salim Mandviwala expressed serious concern over the powers to the Directorate General of Intelligence and Risk Management Customs for taking action against taxpayers under the AML law. 'We have received many complaints on issuance of illegal notices to the business community under the AML', he said. All these notices issued in the past were withdrawn on the intervention of the Senate Standing Committee on Finance. These powers should not be given to the FBR officials as they were misused in the past, Mandviwala said. Finance Minister assured the committee that it would look into the matter and would examine FBR powers under the AML law. In a landmark move, the committee approved sweeping amendments to the Customs Act, 1969, targeting the issue of tempered and tampered chassis vehicles. As per the new law, any vehicle found with tampered chassis number, Cut-and-weld modifications or Re-stamped chassis will be presumed smuggled even if registered with any Motor Registration Authority. FBR Chairman Langrial clarified that such vehicles will be confiscated and destroyed. They won't be auctioned again. 'In principle, these vehicles should be set on fire to avoid resale of parts.' The Standing Committee recommended that the confiscation and destruction of such vehicles must occur within 30 days of seizure. FBR Chairman said that the tampered vehicles cannot be allowed to be auctioned. Even if the tempered vehicles have been registered by the Motor Registration Authority, they are liable to be confiscation. Chairman of the committee asked FBR to share number of confiscated vehicles used by the customs officials. A committee member questioned that why customs department collected duties and taxes on tempered vehicles during legalization of non-duty paid cars under the last amnesty scheme. FBR Member Customs explained that new section ('187A. Presumption as to legal character of vehicle), any vehicle is detained or seized under this Act or the rules made there under and such vehicle upon forensic examination is found to be having a tampered chassis number or cut and weld chassis or chassis number filled with welding material or re-stamped or body changed, such vehicle shall be presumed to be smuggled, even if registered with any Motor Registration Authority, and shall be liable to confiscation. Copyright Business Recorder, 2025
New Straits Times
06-06-2025
- Business
- New Straits Times
Former MACC chief questions legality of second seizure of Ilham Tower
Former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Chief Commissioner Tan Sri Dzulkifli Ahmad has questioned the legality of the second seizure of Ilham Tower, suggesting the move may exceed the bounds of Malaysian law. Now a practising lawyer, Dzulkifli pointed out that the asset had already been seized under Section 38(1) of the MACC Act on Dec 18, 2023. He said action under Section 38 requires the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) to be satisfied that the asset in question - Ilham Tower - either constitutes the proceeds of, or is evidence related to, a corruption offence. "If no charges are brought or civil forfeiture proceedings initiated before June 17, 2025 - the end of the statutory 18-month period - it raises a fundamental question as to whether the original seizure was justified," he said in a statement today. Dzulkifli, the MACC's third chief commissioner, added that although the MACC Act and the Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA) operate under different legal frameworks, two overlapping seizure orders on the same property may be seen as an overreach of authority. "This is because legal powers must be exercised based on necessity, fairness, and proportionality," he said. It was reported yesterday that Ilham Tower, located on Jalan Binjai, had once again been seized by MACC. The commission said it had obtained approval from the DPP to seize the building, which is linked to the late former finance minister Tun Daim Zainuddin. According to the agency, the latest seizure was carried out via an Immovable Property Seizure Notice dated June 4, 2025, under Section 51(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFPUAA). Dzulkifli said enforcement actions must be grounded in clear legal thresholds, not procedural convenience. "If AMLA is invoked merely to maintain control of the asset as the earlier MACC order nears expiry, it may undermine the rule of law and call into question the legitimacy of the original seizure," he said. He also noted that the absence of further action by June 18 would suggest that Ilham Tower was never genuinely linked to a corruption offence under the MACC Act. "This raises a critical question: why is there now a need for a new seizure order under Section 51 of AMLA? What new evidence, if any, justifies this action?" he asked. He added that the Ilham Tower case presents a significant test of how far enforcement and prosecutorial powers may be exercised within the law. "With the June 17 deadline approaching, all eyes are on the DPP's next move. Will there be a charge? Forfeiture? Or will the order lapse - signalling that the asset was wrongly targeted from the outset?" he said.
New Straits Times
06-06-2025
- Business
- New Straits Times
Bersatu's RM195 million bank account freeze stays, court rules
KUALA LUMPUR: Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia's (Bersatu) bank account containing RM195 million will continue to be frozen pending the outcome of two judicial review applications and related criminal proceedings, the High Court ruled recently. Judicial Commissioner Gan Techiong made the ruling in CIMB Bank's application seeking a court declaration on whether it should maintain the freeze on the account or release the funds following conflicting instructions from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and Bersatu's executive secretary, Datuk Muhammad Suhaimi Yahya. The bank filed the interpleader application after receiving a letter of demand from Suhaimi seeking the release of the funds, which were deposited into the party's account by Bukhary Equity Sdn Bhd. CIMB, as the sole plaintiff, named the MACC, the public prosecutor and Suhaimi as defendants. Gan said the dispute could not be resolved summarily, as the issues raised were already the subject of pending judicial review proceedings and a criminal trial involving former prime minister and Bersatu president Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin. "The disputes between the defendants are not suitable to be determined summarily by this court in hearing the bank's interpleader. "They are questions of law and disputed facts forming the subject matters of the judicial review applications at the Special Powers Division of this court and the aforesaid criminal prosecution at the Sessions Court – all of which are still pending hearing and trial, respectively. "If this court is to delve deeper, the effect would be to usurp the domain of other courts that ought to be making the final determination on a wider range of issues," he said in his ground of judgment dated April 9 this year. He said Muhyiddin had been charged in March 2023 in his capacity as Bersatu's president over funds allegedly received by the party, which fulfilled the requirement under Section 52A of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLA) to sustain the seizure order on the account. Gan said a society like Bersatu does not have a separate legal personality, as the law allows charges to be brought against its office bearers. The court said in this case, the president (Muhyiddin) was charged in relation to the very funds in question. The court also rejected a late 376-page affidavit filed by Suhaimi's lawyers, saying it was inadmissible as it was filed without leave of court and at a very late stage of proceedings. "The fact that such a lengthy affidavit was filed at the eleventh hour reinforces my view that the matter is not suitable to be summarily determined in this interpleader." Gan then ordered CIMB to continue holding the funds until the High Court's Special Powers Division disposes of the judicial review applications filed by Muhyiddin and Suhaimi, which are still pending. The first judicial review challenges the legality of the freezing order issued by MACC in January 2023, while the second seeks to quash the seizure order issued by the public prosecutor in April of the same year. Leave to proceed with both reviews was granted last year, but the substantive hearings have yet to take place. Muhyiddin is facing four charges under the MACC Act and two under AMLA involving a total of RM200 million, including RM195 million allegedly transferred into the Bersatu account held with CIMB Islamic Bank. Lawyers Sathya Kumardas and Daud Sulaiman appeared for the bank while senior federal counsel Nurhafizza Azizan and federal counsel Mohammad Salehuddin Md Ali represented the MACC and the public prosecutor. Bersatu was represented by lawyers Chethan Jethwani and Tang Jia Yearn.
The Sun
05-06-2025
- Business
- The Sun
Foreign transaction firms must boost AMLA compliance diligence
KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian business owners engaged in international transactions are advised to maintain comprehensive records and promptly report any suspicious activity to Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) to ensure compliance with the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001(AMLA). Lawyer Guok Ngek Seong, who has nearly 25 years of experience in civil and criminal litigation, told Bernama that companies operating in high-risk sectors such as maritime, petroleum and logistics, which frequently conduct foreign exchange transactions, must exercise heightened diligence in documenting their operations. He was speaking on the matter in light of recent actions taken by BNM, which imposed administrative monetary penalties amounting to RM4.95 million on several financial institutions for breaches of statutory and regulatory obligations. The penalties involved non-compliance with provisions under the Development Financial Institutions Act 2002 as well as failures to adhere to requirements under the Anti-Money Laundering, Countering Financing of Terrorism and Targeted Financial Sanctions for Financial Institutions Policy Document. These regulatory actions reflect the heightened scrutiny placed on financial and corporate entities, reinforcing the need for robust compliance measures, especially in sectors exposed to cross-border transactions. Guok stressed that proper record-keeping may constitute a key line of defence should a company come under investigation for alleged money laundering or involvement in unlawful activities. 'BNM has the authority to conduct annual checks on such entities to ensure compliance with AMLA regulations,' he said. When asked whether litigants may obtain court orders through pre-action discovery or the Norwich Pharmacal process, Guok explained that such orders are available to parties seeking disclosure from individuals or entities not directly involved in the anticipated proceedings. He noted that Norwich Pharmacal orders permit a litigant to compel a third party, who is not itself implicated in the alleged wrongdoing but is mixed up in it innocently, to disclose information necessary to identify or pursue the actual wrongdoer. 'However, the court must balance such applications to prevent any form of abuse or 'fishing expeditions', particularly in light of, among other considerations, the principle of banker-client privilege. 'It is sometimes crucial for clients to obtain documents from banks, especially in cases where suspicious transactions have been traced to accounts held by corporations later found to be involved in fraudulent activities,' he said. He said the only viable means for victims to substantiate such transactions is by obtaining the relevant documentation, which may be instrumental in identifying the mechanisms or systems employed to facilitate the fraudulent activity. Commenting on the Bankers' Books (Evidence) Act 1949 (BBEA), Guok noted that while Section 6 restricts the compellability of bank officers to produce bankers' books where the bank is not a party to the proceedings, the court nonetheless retains the discretion to issue such an order where appropriate. 'The court must balance the interests of banker-client confidentiality against the issues in the particular suit before making appropriate orders. 'While some discovery applications may be deemed an abuse of process, others are genuine, especially when litigants require documents from banks to trace the money trail in their cases,' he added.
