Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)

Purpose Money laundering has been a focal problem worldwide. Governments constantly come up with initiatives to fight against this offence. To clean proceeds of corruption, the laundering of money is utilised as it transforms ‘dirty’ money into ‘clean’ ones. A comparative analysis between Malaysia’s...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Aurasu, Anusha, A. Rahman, Aspalella
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/1/JMLC%2021%201%202019%20104-111.pdf
http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/
http://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-04-2017-0016
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.uum.repo.25535
record_format eprints
spelling my.uum.repo.255352019-01-31T06:39:36Z http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/ Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK) Aurasu, Anusha A. Rahman, Aspalella KZ Law of Nations Purpose Money laundering has been a focal problem worldwide. Governments constantly come up with initiatives to fight against this offence. To clean proceeds of corruption, the laundering of money is utilised as it transforms ‘dirty’ money into ‘clean’ ones. A comparative analysis between Malaysia’s AMLATFPUAA and UK’s POCA will be made on the basis of the similarities and differences of both legislations, in terms of forfeiture provisions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the current forfeiture regime in both jurisdictions is effective in fighting against money laundering. Design/methodology/approach This paper will be based on a doctrinal research where reliance will mainly be on relevant case laws and legislations. AMLATFPUAA and POCA are key legislations which will be utilised for the purpose of analysis. Findings Strengths and weaknesses of both AMLATFPUAA and POCA are identified through a comparative analysis where findings show that POCA is more comprehensive than AMLATFPUAA in terms of offences covered by it and standard of proof. With that, the anti-money laundering laws can further be improvised by being a better and efficient regime where Malaysia and UK will be able to discharge their duties effectively on forfeiting benefits from criminals. Originality/value This paper would offer some guiding principles for academics, banks, their legal advisers, practitioners and policy makers, not only in Malaysia but also elsewhere. Emerald Group Publishing Limited 2018 Article PeerReviewed application/pdf en http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/1/JMLC%2021%201%202019%20104-111.pdf Aurasu, Anusha and A. Rahman, Aspalella (2018) Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK). Journal of Money Laundering Control, 21 (1). pp. 104-111. ISSN 1368-5201 http://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-04-2017-0016 doi:10.1108/JMLC-04-2017-0016
institution Universiti Utara Malaysia
building UUM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Utara Malaysia
content_source UUM Institutionali Repository
url_provider http://repo.uum.edu.my/
language English
topic KZ Law of Nations
spellingShingle KZ Law of Nations
Aurasu, Anusha
A. Rahman, Aspalella
Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
description Purpose Money laundering has been a focal problem worldwide. Governments constantly come up with initiatives to fight against this offence. To clean proceeds of corruption, the laundering of money is utilised as it transforms ‘dirty’ money into ‘clean’ ones. A comparative analysis between Malaysia’s AMLATFPUAA and UK’s POCA will be made on the basis of the similarities and differences of both legislations, in terms of forfeiture provisions. The purpose of this paper is to investigate whether the current forfeiture regime in both jurisdictions is effective in fighting against money laundering. Design/methodology/approach This paper will be based on a doctrinal research where reliance will mainly be on relevant case laws and legislations. AMLATFPUAA and POCA are key legislations which will be utilised for the purpose of analysis. Findings Strengths and weaknesses of both AMLATFPUAA and POCA are identified through a comparative analysis where findings show that POCA is more comprehensive than AMLATFPUAA in terms of offences covered by it and standard of proof. With that, the anti-money laundering laws can further be improvised by being a better and efficient regime where Malaysia and UK will be able to discharge their duties effectively on forfeiting benefits from criminals. Originality/value This paper would offer some guiding principles for academics, banks, their legal advisers, practitioners and policy makers, not only in Malaysia but also elsewhere.
format Article
author Aurasu, Anusha
A. Rahman, Aspalella
author_facet Aurasu, Anusha
A. Rahman, Aspalella
author_sort Aurasu, Anusha
title Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
title_short Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
title_full Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
title_fullStr Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
title_full_unstemmed Forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between Malaysia and United Kingdom (UK)
title_sort forfeiture of criminal proceeds under anti-money laundering laws: a comparative analysis between malaysia and united kingdom (uk)
publisher Emerald Group Publishing Limited
publishDate 2018
url http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/1/JMLC%2021%201%202019%20104-111.pdf
http://repo.uum.edu.my/25535/
http://doi.org/10.1108/JMLC-04-2017-0016
_version_ 1644284352607027200
score 13.214268