Javascript must be enabled to continue!
CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION IN MALAYSIA
View through CrossRef
The Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 [AMLAFTA] empowers the Malaysian Courts to forfeit any property that is the subject of a money-laundering offence via sections 55 and 56 of the AMLAFTA. The rationale of this empowerment is to ensure that all property used in the commission of a money laundering offence is forfeited. Hence, the criminals do not gain any benefits from their crimes. However, it is observed that the provision related to civil forfeiture, specifically under section 56 of the AMLAFTA appears problematic in many instances due to the requirement attached and the civil standard of proof. As such, this article intends to detail the civil forfeiture mechanisms under the AMLAFTA. This article used the qualitative method in doctrinal legal research to collect and analyse all the information related to the topic from various primary and secondary data such as legal provisions, case laws and secondary sources, namely journals and articles on civil forfeiture, especially when applying the standard of proof. The article analyses the substantive law and procedural requirements for civil forfeitures based on Malaysia’s relevant legal provisions and cases. This article also examines the Malaysian Courts’ trends in deciding civil forfeiture cases and analyses the standard of proof for civil forfeiture. This article suggests amendments to section 56 of the AMLAFTA to introduce a provision on the rebuttable presumption to ensure that the objective of creating the civil forfeiture provision can be achieved.
Title: CIVIL FORFEITURE UNDER ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING LEGISLATION IN MALAYSIA
Description:
The Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 [AMLAFTA] empowers the Malaysian Courts to forfeit any property that is the subject of a money-laundering offence via sections 55 and 56 of the AMLAFTA.
The rationale of this empowerment is to ensure that all property used in the commission of a money laundering offence is forfeited.
Hence, the criminals do not gain any benefits from their crimes.
However, it is observed that the provision related to civil forfeiture, specifically under section 56 of the AMLAFTA appears problematic in many instances due to the requirement attached and the civil standard of proof.
As such, this article intends to detail the civil forfeiture mechanisms under the AMLAFTA.
This article used the qualitative method in doctrinal legal research to collect and analyse all the information related to the topic from various primary and secondary data such as legal provisions, case laws and secondary sources, namely journals and articles on civil forfeiture, especially when applying the standard of proof.
The article analyses the substantive law and procedural requirements for civil forfeitures based on Malaysia’s relevant legal provisions and cases.
This article also examines the Malaysian Courts’ trends in deciding civil forfeiture cases and analyses the standard of proof for civil forfeiture.
This article suggests amendments to section 56 of the AMLAFTA to introduce a provision on the rebuttable presumption to ensure that the objective of creating the civil forfeiture provision can be achieved.
Related Results
The taxing business of money laundering: South Africa
The taxing business of money laundering: South Africa
PurposeThe OECD recently identified tax crime as one of the top three sources of money laundering. In the context of increased acknowledgement that tax evasion, capital flight and ...
Money Laundering Kejahatan Trans Nasionaldan Urgensi Penanggulangannya
Money Laundering Kejahatan Trans Nasionaldan Urgensi Penanggulangannya
Abstract
In the era of globalization, the problem of money laundering is becoming increasingly widespread because the existence of this crime involves many factor...
Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine
Genesis of regulation of special forfeiture in Ukraine
Introduction. This paper analyzes the development of norms on the implementation of special forfeiture in Ukraine since its independence.
The purpose of the paper is determining th...
Detection mechanisms under Kenya’s anti-money laundering regime: omissions and loopholes
Detection mechanisms under Kenya’s anti-money laundering regime: omissions and loopholes
Purpose
This paper aims to detect the methods that facilitate the identification of potential money laundering activities in Kenya. Kenya is a transit point for international drug ...
Women and Dirty Money: How Women are Affected by, Involved, and Counter Money Laundering
Women and Dirty Money: How Women are Affected by, Involved, and Counter Money Laundering
Money laundering is a growing threat to global and Indonesian national development. Similar independent research has been minimal and has resulted in gender facets of development i...
Money Laundering Detection System with Intelligent Agents
Money Laundering Detection System with Intelligent Agents
Over the years, people acquire money illegally from public treasury and launder it by depositing it as clean money into the banking system. Hence, the laundered money is integrated...
Money Laundering Detection System with Intelligent Agents
Money Laundering Detection System with Intelligent Agents
Over the years, people acquire money illegally from public treasury and launder it by depositing it as clean money into the banking system. Hence, the laundered money is integrated...
Prinsip Pembuktian Perkara Tindak Pidana Pencucian Yang Berdiri Sendiri (Stand Alone Money Laundering)
Prinsip Pembuktian Perkara Tindak Pidana Pencucian Yang Berdiri Sendiri (Stand Alone Money Laundering)
AbstractThis research will explain about the nature of the stand alone money laundering’s case handling and the substantiation’s formulation on the stand alone money laundering’s c...

