KUALA LUMPUR: The freezing of Bersatu’s bank accounts was conducted in accordance with the law and not arbitrarily, says Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) Legal and Prosecution Division director Datuk Wan Shaharuddin Wan Ladin.
He said that the action was taken under Section 50(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLATFPUAA) 2001.
According to him, the accounts were frozen as they were the “subject matter” of investigations and prosecution, and therefore, could not be released until the trial concluded.
“Section 50(1) pertains to the ‘seizure of movable property in financial institutions,’ and in this case, the Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) exercised their authority under the section to instruct the financial institution to freeze the movable property in question until the order is varied or revoked,” he said in a statement today.
He added that the duration of the freezing order is clearly outlined in Section 52A of the same Act.
“It states that a freezing order issued under this Act ceases to have effect after 12 months if no charges are brought under this Act against the person subject to the order. It is clear that this case has obtained prosecution consent, and Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, as Bersatu’s president, has been charged under Section 4(1)(b) of AMLATFPUAA 2001,” he said.
Wan Shaharuddin noted that Bersatu had filed for leave to initiate a judicial review challenging MACC’s actions in freezing its bank accounts for investigation on May 29, 2023.
“On Oct 30, 2023, the Kuala Lumpur High Court granted Bersatu leave for judicial review and set the trial date for Sept 24, 2025.
“I urge the public to understand that all actions taken by the authorities in prosecuting this case are based on the provisions of the law, and for those accused, there are avenues to defend themselves and prove their innocence within the legal framework,” he added.
Yesterday, Muhyiddin reportedly said Bersatu was considering legal action against MACC and the related bank, alleging that the freezing of its accounts constituted an abuse of power, as the party had never been charged with any legal offence.
He further claimed that while the law allowed for account freezing for up to 12 months, Bersatu’s accounts remained frozen beyond this period, and the party’s lawyers were exploring possible legal remedies.
