Actually you are not right. MACC ACT allows seizure of assets if the assets is suspicious or comes from dubious means. It is very powerful. In fact, if you follow news, the wife already mentioned that this case made them realise how powerful MACC act is. She is, after all, a lawyer too.

Under the MACC Act 2009 (Section 38) and Anti-Money Laundering Act (AMLA 2001), using both conviction-based and non-conviction-based (NCBF) methods, even if a criminal case isn't possible, by applying for court orders to freeze or forfeit illicitly acquired assets like property or cash.

The burden of proof is not actually on MACC, but rather on the asset owner to prove how they were able to attain such assets.

This post has been edited by trojandude: Dec 11 2025, 01:38 AM

No guilty conviction is needed. MACC act allows seizure and forfeiture without one as long as the money is suspicious. If you follow news, the wife already mentioned that this case made them realise how powerful MACC act is. She is, after all, a lawyer too.

Also, everyone knows who the names are. There are only 8 concerned parties that applied for gag order according to the news article. We already know there's the wife and four children. That's five of them already. If I had to make a guess, the remaining three are likely family related or shareholders of the company. IIRC, for example, Ilham isn't fully owned by Daim's family. You likely would be able to get the details on e-ssm lol.

There is no privacy in Malaysia.

This post has been edited by trojandude: Dec 11 2025, 01:37 AM

Yes, that is exactly what asset declaration is for. Do you think MACC have those powers for no reason? MACC seized Ismail Sabri's RM167m cash without supplying any evidence. All they said was - you didn't declare the asset. https://www.malaymail.com/news/malaysia/202...il-sabri/192991

1) Get you to declare asset. This is law, you cannot say no.
2) Any assets you don't declare, but later found, you're even in more trouble. Look at Sabri.
3) Seize and forfeit any asset that is deemed suspiciously obtained. No criminal conviction needed, as long as suspicion is sound enough.

Draconian and powerful? Yes. But Anwar wasn't the one who created this law. It was enacted during Najib and Mahathir's time. And it's very powerful. They have seized and forfeited over RM28 billion in assets in just five years.

Just like police of certain grade have powers to search your house without a warrant. No evidence needed, suspicion is all that is needed.

This post has been edited by trojandude: Dec 11 2025, 01:48 AM

Not the first time it's been used and not the last either.

Asset declaration does not equal to incriminating yourself.

We're also not in the USA.

What's the relevance? LMAO

This is Malaysian court, not American.