KUALA LUMPUR, Oct 13 — The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) recorded asset freezes worth RM1.27 billion from 2022 to September this year, involving bank accounts, jewellery, immovable property and other valuables.
Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Institutional Reform) M. Kulasegaran said the asset freezes were carried out under Section 44 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Act 613).
He said 1,336 asset-freezing orders were issued under the Act in 2025, while another 1,006 were issued from Jan 1 to Sept 30 this year.
A total of 481 freezing orders were revoked without charges in 2025, while another 781 were revoked in the first nine months of this year, he added.
“The withdrawal, cancellation or variation of an asset-freezing order does not necessarily mean that no offence has occurred or that the investigation has no basis.
“This is because freezing assets is part of the investigative process and an enforcement measure to prevent assets suspected of being linked to an offence from being transferred, disposed of or traded,” he said.
He was answering a question from Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong on the power to freeze assets under Section 44 of Act 613, as well as regulatory and investigative issues involving the MACC, during the Special Chamber sitting in the Dewan Rakyat today.
Kulasegaran said investigations conducted by the MACC and other enforcement agencies were not carried out arbitrarily, but in accordance with established criteria.
He said preliminary action was taken based on reports, prima facie investigations and the presence of suspicious transactions, such as unusually large sums of money moving in and out of accounts.
The 90-day period provided under Section 44 of Act 613 allows a freezing order to be revoked as soon as possible once an investigation has been completed, he added.
“I agree with the Honourable Member that having a law such as the one in Singapore, which is more independent and impartial ... would be better if it were left to the courts.
“This is something I have read about and examined, and I have told the agency concerned to look into it because it would be a win-win position, and the MACC’s good name would be respected,” he said.
He was responding to a supplementary question from Wee on the need to tighten governance, including requiring court approval before freezing accounts or seizing assets belonging to listed companies, to protect the interests of minority shareholders. — Bernama