Implications of forfeiting property in money laundering cases in Malaysia

Author:Zaiton Hamin, Normah Omar, Muhammad Muaz Abdul Hakim
Position:Accounting Research Institute and Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia
Pages:334-344
SUMMARY

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the broad concept of forfeiture, its legal positions in the UK and Malaysia, and to highlight the implications of such forfeiture systems and legislations. Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a doctrinal legal analysis and secondary data, which analyses primary sources, the POCA (2002) and the AMLATFA 2001, and secondary... (see full summary)

 
FREE EXCERPT
Implications of forfeiting property
in money laundering cases
in Malaysia
Zaiton Hamin
Accounting Research Institute and Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi Mara,
Shah Alam, Malaysia
Normah Omar
Accounting Research Institute, Universiti Teknologi Mara,
Shah Alam, Malaysia, and
Muhammad Muaz Abdul Hakim
Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi Mara, Shah Alam, Malaysia
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examinethe broad concept of forfeiture, its legal positions in the
UK and Malaysia,and to highlight the implications of such forfeiture systems and legislations.
Design/methodology/approach This paper uses a doctrinallegal analysis and secondary data, which
analyses primary sources, the POCA(2002) and the AMLATFA 2001, and secondary sources including case
law, articlesin academic journals, books and onlinedatabases.
Findings The authors contend that the civil forfeiture system and law have far-reaching implications,
affecting not only law enforcement agencies, but also on property owners, the courts and bona de third
parties. Also, civil forfeiture law as contained in AMLATFA 2001 represents one of the most serious
encroachments on private property rights. Not only that, such a legal rule has made property, and not the
owner, guiltyuntil proven innocent.
Originality/value This paper couldbe a useful source of information for practitioners, academiciansand
students.It could also be a benecial guide for policymakers for any possiblefuture amendments to the law.
Keywords Money laundering, Terrorism nancing, Forfeiture
Paper type Conceptual paper
Introduction
The forfeiture of property in Malaysia has been recently governed by the Anti-Money
Laundering and Anti-TerrorismFinancing Act 2001 (hereinafter the AMLATFA). Recent
literature by Mohd.Yasin (2007) indicates that prior to AMALATFA 2001, forfeiture cases
almost exclusively centred on drug-trafcking crime as governed under the Dangerous
Drugs (Forfeiture of Property) Act 1988. In addition, Nordin et al. (2012) contends that the
AMLATFA gives certain agencies authority to trace, seize and ultimately conscate
criminally derived wealth, to forfeit the property and also to enable inter-government
exchange of informationwith counterparts in other countries. He then emphasizesthat there
are amendments to the AMLATFA, which have been passed by the Parliamentin 2001 and
This research is supported by the Accounting Research Institute and the Faculty of Law, University
Teknologi MARA (UiTM), Shah Alam, Selangor, Malaysia.
JMLC
20,4
334
Journalof Money Laundering
Control
Vol.20 No. 4, 2017
pp. 334-344
© Emerald Publishing Limited
1368-5201
DOI 10.1108/JMLC-10-2015-0046
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/1368-5201.htm

To continue reading

REQUEST YOUR TRIAL