Malaysian Court upholds confiscation of funds tied to illegal bauxite mining

The Court of Appeal on March 17, 2025, upheld the forfeiture of RM44,000 (approx. USD10,000) in cash belonging to Syed Umar Khalil Syed Khalid, an assistant director of enforcement at the Pahang Land and Mines Department. The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) seized the money a decade ago and discovered it hidden inside a washing machine at Syed Umar Khalil’s residence.

Image Credit: New Straits Times

A three-judge panel, chaired by Datuk Azman Abdullah, affirmed the forfeiture order, which had previously been granted by both the Sessions Court and the Pahang High Court.

Judge Datuk Azman Abdullah stated, "This court found that there is no merit in the defence's appeal. This follows the defence's bare assertion, which failed to rebut the prosecution's case. The appellant was given the opportunity to rebut, but this court found that they were merely bare assertions."

"The appellant (Syed Umar Khalil) could have put an affidavit, following his wife's claim that the money was in a labelled envelope — labelled as income from [his] father's palm oil plantation. However, this was not placed in the appellant's affidavit when it was a burden for him to say so. As a result, there is no merit, and the decision of the Sessions Court and the High Court is affirmed."

Presiding over the appeal were Court of Appeal judges Datuk Mohamed Zaini Mazlan and Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh, alongside Judge Azman. The forfeiture against Syed Umar Khalil was carried out under Section 41(1) of the MACC Act 2009, which permits the seizure of valuables without the need for prosecution.

On March 10, 2021, the Pahang Sessions Court, led by Judge Datuk Ahmad Zamzani Mohd Zin, approved the forfeiture. This decision was later upheld by High Court Judge Datuk Zainal Aznam Abdul Aziz on December 13, 2022.

Previously, the appeal hearing had been adjourned several times. However, the bench ruled that the proceedings would move forward on Monday, even in the absence of Syed Umar Khalil.

Representing Syed Umar Khalil, counsel M. Athimulan argued that the Sessions Court had erred in granting the forfeiture. He contended that the court failed to properly evaluate the evidence, relying solely on the investigating officer's testimony. Athimulan emphasised that, based on the balance of probabilities, there was no concrete evidence linking the RM44,000 to corrupt activities. He further asserted that the prosecution must first establish a predicate offence before any forfeiture can be justified.

Additionally, he pointed out that there was no proof to suggest the money originated from one of the illegal bauxite miners, identified only as Goh.

At a pivotal moment, Judge Zaini questioned Athimulan, asking why there was a need to place the money in a washing machine if not for the purpose of “laundering” it.

However, in response, Deputy Public Prosecutor (DPP) Zander Lim Wai Keong stated that the prosecution had secured corroborative evidence from Goh, the illegal bauxite miner who was granted protection, confirming that the RM44,000 in question was intended for payments made between May and November 2015.

Lim further pointed out that Syed Umar Khalil’s affidavit consisted merely of unsubstantiated claims, lacking specific details regarding the source of the money.