Tuesday, May 31, 2022

COMPOUNDS for serious money laundering offences allow government to 'protect the Guilty' from trials and convictions must be abolished??

When the courts are OUSTED from determining whether a person is guilty or not, after a Fair Trial for serious offences like corruption, kleptocracy offences, money laundering, terrorist financing, etc offences by the executive/administration simply making a COMPOUND offer is very wrong and unjust.

In the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001, section 92 (1) states that ‘…The competent authority or relevant enforcement agency, as the case may be, may, with the consent of the Public Prosecutor, compound any offence under this Act or under regulations made under this Act, by accepting from the person reasonably suspected of having committed the offence such amount not exceeding fifty per centum of the amount of the maximum fine for that offence, including the daily fine, if any, in the case of a continuing offence, to which that person would have been liable if he had been convicted of the offence, within such time as may be specified in its written offer…’.   

So, ALL offences under this ACT are compoundable... similar provisions allowing compound in many other laws, even when the crime causes death/injury???

That means, the government can 'PROTECT' some who may be guilty by ending investigation, not charging in court, ending trials prematurely ...using COMPOUNDS.

When you pay a COMPOUND, that is the end of matters... 

Payment of COMPOUND currently is not even considered ADMISSION of guilt - and there will be no CRIMINAL RECORD, which usually are recorded convictions by court...

ABOLISH COMPOUNDS FOR SERIOUS OFFENCES -  when a person is charged in court, they can plead Guilty, and this will reduce the sentence. So charge everyone in court.

Compounds for smaller offences like speeding, not wearing face mask in breach of Covid prevention laws are OK to remain compoundable offences.

The 2nd point - accepting and paying a compound should be taken as admission of guilt, and must be recorded as such. WHY? that is to deter crime. So, if you speed, and pay the compound - but if you again speed another time, compound offered by take into account that this is a repeat offence >> so higher compound will be fair....

Remember MP Ahmad Mazlan paid compound, escaped trial and/or conviction.

Is Ahmad Mazlan GUILTY? Did he commit the crime?

In my opinion, the fact that he paid the COMPOUND is an admission of the crime -and that should be it. Ahmad Maslan, cannot be saying that he did not break the law - What do you think? It is absurd for an 'innocent person' to accept and pay compounds...

But, the problem is that Ahmad Maslan gets acquitted - unnecessary really, as when you accept and pay compounds, the prosecution cannot again charge you for the same offense anyway >> so, why did the Court or Judge Acquit? The court could have simply discharged him..when prosecution has no more intention to proceed with the trial...

In Malaysia, many laws give the Minister/Executive the power to offer compounds - hence, a stop of investigations - and no charging in court.

Compounds originally was for lesser offences and it required the agreement of the victim, not the prosecutor, or the Minister or any other public officer. So VICTIM agreement. Now, compound depends on the Minister/executive,sometimes the consent of the public prosecutor..

Compounds in Malaysian laws need to be reviewed - and compounds should never be available for serious offences...

MACC says Ahmad Maslan offered compound in lieu of trial in 2019

  • Nation
  • Wednesday, 29 Sep 2021

Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan. -Bernamapic

PUTRAJAYA: The compound slapped on Datuk Seri Ahmad Maslan is a punitive action and is part of an asset recovery effort under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act, says the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).

The MACC explained that the Pontian MP had been offered the compound in October 2019.

"However, he had chosen to be tried in court. Ahmad was then charged under Sections 4(1) and 32(8) (c) of the Act on January 20, 2020.

"During the trial, he had submitted a representation and went on to agree to pay the compound," the MACC said in a statement Wednesday (Sept 29).

The MACC was commenting on the High Court’s decision to acquit Ahmad of his two criminal charges involving money laundering and giving a false statement to the MACC.

High Court judge Justice Ahmad Shahrir Mohd Salleh made the order of a discharge and acquittal here on Wednesday (Sept 29) after the court was informed that the prosecution was withdrawing its case against the Pontian MP.

According to a media statement issued by law firm Messrs Shahrul Hamidi & Haziq, Ahmad had paid RM1.1mil as agreed by the prosecution and the defence.

Ahmad was accused of violating Section 113(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act 1967 by not stating his real income on the RM2mil he received from former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak in the Income Tax Return Form for Assessment Year 2013.

He was alleged to have received the money, believed to be proceeds of illegal activities, via a check from AmIslamic Bank Berhad dated November 27, 2013, which he personally cashed on the same day.

The offence was allegedly committed at the IRB, Duta Branch, Government Office Complex, Jalan Tuanku Abdul Halim, on April 30, 2014. - Star, 29/9/2021



No comments: