With current development
involving financial crimes in Malaysia, I believe that by adopting a single and
comprehensive legislation similar to UK Fraud Act 2006 will empower the
investigators and prosecutors to execute their duties without any unwarranted pressure.
This is vital because the independency of these agencies without hostile
environment will allow them to investigate matters which are very much dear to
the general public of Malaysia. Further, a successful prosecution will be deterrence
for high profile fraudsters do not to commit such act for the benefit of the country’s
economy.
The perception of the public on
these agencies especially on MACC (Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission) as a
body which only prey on the small fishes rather the big ones further deteriorates
its reputation even though the Commission in the past played a significant role
in reducing bribery and corruption.. As propagated by some quarters from the Malaysian
public, this Commission needs to have the prosecution powers to prosecute such
offenders in court without any bureaucratic obstacles. I fully support this notion as recent incidents indicate that
such power needed to stop the propagators from further damaging the this
beloved nation.
Fraud, bribery and corruption are
signs of a serious epidemic, which a country needs to find ways to reduce or
eliminate fully. Therefore, the UK took a bold step by stroked away the eight deception
based offences in the 1968 and 1978 Theft Acts to create simple, yet
comprehensive fraud legislation. The Government Consultation paper on Fraud Law
Reform in 2004 had identified the overlap between the deception offences
between the Theft Acts; and the need to make the law clearer and more
accessible for juries.
According to the UK Home Office,
the purpose of the Act is “to clarify the law, and provide law enforcers and
prosecutors with a modern and flexible law of fraud.” The new legislation aims
to provide a package of offences which can keep stride with the problems posed
by advances in technology, modern methods of property transfer and commercial
transactions. Further, this legislation only has 16 sections and is worded in a
way that its can be easily understood. It’s is also effortlessly applicable for
the investigators and prosecutors to use the said Act.
This Act creates a general
offence of fraud which can be committed in three ways i.e. fraud by false
representation, fraud by falling to disclose information and fraud by abuse of
position. In summary, this Act emphases on dishonesty and method of
committing fraud. In my opinion, this direction will help the investigators and
prosecutors to execute their duties meritoriously.
By reducing rigidity or over
meticulous requirement in preparing for cases involving financial crimes will
give a great escape route for said criminals. Under this Act the standard of
proof will on the defendant to prove to the Court that he did not acted
dishonestly. By shifting the burden of proof from prosecutors to defendants,
this Act allows the victims to be protected and there is a legal duty for
defendants to disclose incriminating evidence against them. In addition, if
anyone who has committed any of these forms of offences which are known as
conduct offences, the maximum punishment will be 10 years imprisonment. Therefore, by enacting a new
legislation which is similar to this Act, the said agencies will have an
operational tool to prosecute the criminals successfully.
In a nutshell, even though this
Act is narrowly defines fraud but its application will cover the wider areas
like falsification, forgery, counterfeiting, money laundering, false accounting
and corruption. The current legislation on financial crimes in Malaysia
especially on fraud and corruption which are too much overlap, technicality and
over-partcularised does not help the relevant agencies to prosecute against
criminals.
The presumption of general public
on these agencies is always negative. But one needs to remember, they are
working under a hostile environment. Therefore, these agencies especially MACC
needs to be independent and to have prosecution powers together with
legislation to prosecute the financial criminals successfully in the Court.
Kuala Lumpur.
Published:
Comments