JHO LOW & THE ‘CURSE’ OF THE MUMMY’S HOUSE: PENANG NGO CHANT & SYDNEY PR FIRM RUN BY BENJAMIN HASLEM NOW ALSO ‘BLIGHTED’ BY MALAYSIAN LAW WHICH ALLOWS SEIZURE OF MANSION – EVEN IF IT WAS NOT ORIGINALLY BOUGHT WITH 1MDB MONEY

Jho Low and the seizure of mummy’s house: The AMLAFAP Act allows it, and may even allow seizure of the family friend and his NGO’s assets;as well as those of the Sydney PR company

Jho Low has an extensive network of lawyers and PR firms working in his defense.While his lawyers might claim legal professional privilege to shield themselves from scrutiny as to the source of Low’s fees, his PR firms and supporters may not.

Malaysia’s anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing laws are  broadly defined and  appear to have been designed to ensure that even the enablers of the crimes do not escape punishment:

LAWS OF MALAYSIA Act 613 

Anti-Money Laundering, AntiTerrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001   

Offence of money laundering 

Section 4. 

(1) Any person who— Act A1467. 

(a) engages, directly or indirectly, in a transaction that involves proceeds of an unlawful activity or instrumentalities of an offence; 

(b) acquires, receives, possesses, disguises, transfers, converts, exchanges, carries, disposes of or uses proceeds of an unlawful activity or instrumentalities of an offence; 

(c) removes from or brings into Malaysia, proceeds of an unlawful activity or instrumentalities of an offence; or 

(d) conceals, disguises or impedes the establishment of the true nature, origin, location, movement, disposition, title of, rights with respect to, or ownership of, proceeds of an unlawful activity or instrumentalities of an offence, commits a money laundering offence and shall on conviction be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fifteen years and shall also be liable to a fine of not less than five times the sum or value of the proceeds of an unlawful activity or instrumentalities of an offence at the time the offence was committed or five million  

FREEZING, SEIZURE AND FORFEITURE Freezing of property.

44. (1) 

Subject to section 50, an enforcement agency may issue an order to freeze any property of any person, or any terrorist property, as the case may be, wherever the property may be, and whether the property is in his possession, under his control or due from any source to him, if— 

(a) an investigation with regard to an unlawful activity has commenced against that person; and  
(b) either— 
(i) the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence under subsection 4(1) or a terrorism financing offence has been or is being or is about to be committed by that person; or 
(ii) the enforcement agency has reasonable grounds to suspect that the property is the proceeds of an unlawful activity or the instrumentalities of an offence.   

Given the broad definitions, it not unlikely that Yan Lee, who runs the NGO Citizens Awareness Chant Group,and Low’s PR firm in Sydney may all be pursued under the provisions above.

Readers should note that the provisions above apply to any property, not merely property acquired with the funds subject of the investigation. 

Jho Low and his family’s argument that their family home could not have been purchased with 1MDB money is irrelevant.

END

Jho Low writes open letter, provides cert in bid to reclaim seized Penang 

family home