The impediments in applying the asset forfeiture measures for money laundering in Malaysia and the United Kingdom

For a long time, the matter of money laundering has been drawn toward the proceeds of crime. In this sense, proceeds of crime can be described as money or property earned from profit-oriented crime. Hence, the necessity for asset recovery, especially to forfeit such proceeds, is considered one of the legal tools to deprive money launderers of illegal profits, and the AML regimes give criminal justice actors the power to do so. However, in applying the asset forfeiture measures involving money laundering and other predicate offences, the criminal justice actors face several legal, technical, and operational constraints. Previous local research has not addressed the application of the forfeiture laws, let alone the impediments in such a process. Given such impediments, the central thesis is twofold. Firstly, the primary criminal justice actors involved in the asset forfeiture process are somewhat reluctant to apply the forfeiture provisions for money laundering cases in the AMLATFPUAA 2001 and favourable to apply other forfeiture laws, especially involving the forfeiture in drugs, corruption, and economic crime cases. Secondly, their reluctance to apply such forfeiture provisions is attributed to their legal, operational, and technical impediments when applying them under the 2001 Act and other forfeiture laws. Guided by these prepositions, the research examines the application of asset forfeiture measures under the AML regime and the impediments facing criminal justice actors. At the theoretical level, this research analyses how the rational choice theory, routine activity theory, proceeds theory, and facilitation theory would inform the implementation of the asset forfeiture process. This study adopts qualitative methodology, in which the primary data is obtained from semi-structured interviews with fifteen respondents involving the judges, prosecutors, and law enforcement agencies. The sampling technique used is purposive sampling. The primary data was triangulated with the representative from Bank Negara Malaysia. The findings of this research are in Chapter Five. The legal analyses of the United Kingdom and Malaysia are presented in Chapter Three and Chapter Four, respectively. This research reveals that criminal justice actors constantly face legal, technical, and operational challenges in their duties. This study aims to contribute to the body of knowledge and literature on the asset forfeiture measures in Malaysia, which would assist policymakers and others directly involved in this system. Moreover, it is crucial for the criminal justice players involved in asset forfeiture to enforce and implement the forfeiture procedures and exercise their duties in good faith to ensure the law's effectiveness and prevent abuses in the system.