Implementation evaluation: a future direction in money laundering investigation

Abstract

Purpose Malaysia has implemented a comprehensive AML/CFT framework, yet its effectiveness remains questionable due to low number of prosecutions on money laundering cases. Therefore, this study aims to understand the reasons for low number of prosecutions, by addressing the challenges faced by the law enforcement agencies in conducting money laundering investigation. This study then identifies future improvement actions to enhance their effectiveness in combating money laundering in future. Design/methodology/approach This study distributed surveys to the law enforcement agencies that are responsible for conducting money laundering investigation in Malaysia. In total, 65 surveys were distributed; however, only 61 were returned to the researchers. Out of the 61 surveys returned, only 39 can be analysed due to incomplete answers given by respective respondents. Findings The results show that the investigating officers are facing difficulties in gathering sufficient information to support their charges. Besides information gathering, they are also facing difficulties due to short investigation timeframe regulated in the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act (AMLATFPUAA) 2001. This study concludes that, although the law enforcement agencies have the power to investigate money laundering and terrorism financing under the act, Malaysia is lacking in having a good investigative support system to assist the law enforcement agencies during the investigation process. Practical implications The results of this study are helpful to the regulators and law enforcement agencies in determining the flaws of the current money laundering investigation practices. This study also provides suggestions for future improvement action. Originality/value Lack of study focuses on money laundering investigation conducted by the law enforcement agencies, especially in the Malaysian setting, makes the study valuable to the money laundering research.

Compliance determinants of anti-money laundering regime among professional accountants in Malaysia

“…Money laundering crimes that extend beyond tax evasion include drug and human trafficking, trade and insurance fraud, prostitution, various illegal profit-motivated crimes derived from banks, securities, arms smuggling, gambling, extortion and terrorism (Irwin et al , 2012). As such, the complex nature of money laundering has become challenging to the law enforcement agencies and relevant authorities in prosecuting money laundering offences (Zolkaflil et al , 2019). Even though money laundering and terrorism financing prosecutions remain low in Malaysia, only 132 of 821 cases were prosecuted, whilst 54 cases remain ongoing (FATF, 2015).…”

A new criminal jurisdiction to combat cross-border money laundering

“…Foreign governments sometimes do not see the request for assistance as valid in their legal context because they do not know the exact fact that the request is legitimate and the relevant differences that exist between the requested country’s legal system and the requester’s. The foreign governments can also see foreign demand as a direct threat to their sovereignty (Hinterseer, 2002; Zolkaflil et al , 2019). Moreover, law enforcement is part of the sovereign right of the state for violations that occur in its territory.…”

Identifying export risks of non-oil products related to money laundering and related strategies

“…Zolkafil et al (2019) revealed that although the law enforcement agencies have the power to investigate money laundering and terrorism financing under the act, Malaysia is lacking in having a good investigative support system to assist the law enforcement agencies during the investigation process. Aurasu and Rahman (2016) concluded that anti-money laundering laws can be improved by being a better and established civil forfeiture regime where Malaysia will be able to discharge its duties well on forfeiting benefits from criminals.…”