What funds are being targeted in the Ilham Tower forfeiture case?

Question

Accepted Answer

Government Seeks Forfeiture of Funds Linked to Ilham Tower and Individual in Daim Case

The Malaysian government is pursuing the forfeiture of funds held in accounts belonging to Ilham Tower Sdn Bhd and an unnamed individual. These accounts are connected to an ongoing investigation involving the late former Finance Minister, Tun Daim Zainuddin. The prosecution has initiated separate forfeiture applications, asserting that the seized movable property is liable for forfeiture under the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Act 2009, as it is believed to have been obtained from or is linked to an offence under the Act.
Forfeiture Applications Filed

Separate forfeiture notices were filed by the prosecution at the Sessions Court on November 28 and December 3. These applications seek a court order to forfeit funds that were seized from the respondents' accounts on May 31, 2024. The legal basis for these actions rests on Section 41(1) of the MACC Act 2009, read in conjunction with Section 376 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which allows for forfeiture of property even without a formal criminal prosecution being initiated.
Alleged Connection to Offence

The prosecution's assertion is that the property in question was obtained from or is connected to an offence stipulated under Section 36(2) of the MACC Act 2009. This forms the primary justification for the government's claim to the seized funds. The prosecution intends to apply for a gazette order, as provided for under Section 41(2) of the MACC Act 2009, to officially notify any interested parties of the forfeiture proceedings.
Adjournment Sought Amidst Related Proceedings

The respondents' legal counsel requested an adjournment of the forfeiture application. This request was based on the existence of related ongoing proceedings in the High Court. These include proceedings concerning Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act, which pertains to the referral of constitutional questions regarding the validity and effect of Section 36 of the MACC Act to the Federal Court. Additionally, a judicial review application concerning the seizure of the accounts under Section 37 of the MACC Act is also underway.
Interim Protective Order Granted

An interim protective order was granted to prevent the disclosure of the respondents' names, bank details, account numbers, and the specific sums of money involved. While the prosecution argued that the identities of the respondents were already in the public domain due to the high-profile nature of the case, they consented to withholding sensitive banking information and financial figures. The court has scheduled February 12, 2026, for the next hearing, at which point any third party with an interest in the property will be formally notified to appear and present their case.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What funds are being targeted in the Ilham Tower forfeiture case?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends