You may be wondering how did Pontian Member of Parliament, Ahmad Maslan get acquitted by the High Court from charges of money laundering and giving false statements to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission – even before trial was completed? Why did MACC discontinue the criminal case in Court against him?
What most people don’t know is that all offences under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 are compoundable under section 92. This means that if MACC (not the Court) is satisfied that Ahmad Mazlan is a “person reasonably suspected of having committed the offence”, MACC can offer him an opportunity to pay a certain sum of money (think of it like a traffic summons payment but a lot higher) in return for them to withdraw that criminal case against him. How sweet of MACC!
It is important to note that the decision to let Ahmad Maslan walk away with a compound payment was made by MACC (with the consent of the Public Prosecutor) – not the High Court. Since MACC made that offer to Ahmad Maslan and he accepted it, MACC would then have withdraw the criminal case against him. In that sense, the Court had no real choice but to discharge the MP.
So, you may ask – having paid the painfully huge compound, can Ahmad Maslan be said to be guilty of the two offences he was originally charged for in Court? Nope. As tempting as the logic may seem, such a conclusion would be legally inaccurate. At best, the potential Deputy Speaker of Parliament can be said to be “reasonably suspected” to have committed those offences. Note the difference. The former is a finding of criminal guilt by a Court. The latter is a suspicion only.
What is interesting is this – Ahmad Maslan was originally charged for not declaring RM2 million to the Income Tax authorities (believed to be proceeds of illegal activities he received from the former prime minister, Najib Tun Razak).
The compound that he paid was RM1.1 million. Think about that.
