Money laundering and the role of ACC
On December 17, the High Court Division wanted to know from the authorities concerned of the Anti-Corruption Commission and the government the names and addresses of Bangladeshi nationals who have laundered money abroad and purchased houses in foreign countries, including in Canada, Singapore, and Malaysia.
It also wanted to know what steps have been taken against them.
The court directed the authorities concerned to submit separate reports to it by February 28, 2021.
On November 22, the same HC Division issued an injunction order to restrain people from laundering money abroad and directed intelligence agencies to take appropriate steps to stop the laundering of money.
With this vigilance shown by the High Court, the Money Laundering Prevention Act 2012 becomes relevant, all over again.
The act tries to be comprehensive in terms of dealing with money laundering and empowers the court enormously to take steps against the act of money laundering. However, provisions of the act also render such judicial steps subject to the approval of the ACC.
The act exhaustively defines and criminalises the act of money laundering. According to it, money laundering means -- among others -- knowingly moving, converting, or transferring proceeds of crime or property involved in an offence for concealing or disguising the illicit nature, source, location, ownership, or control of the proceeds of crime.
Similarly, the act of smuggling money or property earned through legal or illegal means to a foreign country, also falls within the domain of money laundering. Additionally, the acts of participating in, associating with, conspiring, attempting, abetting, instigate or counsel to commit any offence mentioned therein are also considered punishable offence under it.
Section 4 of the act explicitly criminalises money laundering and lays down punishment as well.
Under the same section, any person who commits or abets or conspires to commit the offence of money laundering, shall be punished with imprisonment for a term of at least 4(four) years but not exceeding 12(twelve) years and, in addition to that, a fine equivalent to the twice of the value of the property involved in the offence or taka 10(ten) lakhs, whichever is greater.
In addition to any fine or punishment, the act suggests that the court may pass an order to forfeit the property of the convicted person in favour of the state which directly or indirectly involved in or related with money laundering or any predicate offence.
Moreover, under section 14, the court may, issue an order to freeze or attach the property, within or outside the country, involved in money laundering or any other offence.
Under section 17, additionally, if any person or entity is convicted of the offence of money laundering under this act, the court may pass an order for confiscation of any property, within or outside the country, involved directly or indirectly in money laundering or predicate offence in favour of the state.
The most important section of the act, which makes the ACC immensely important is section 12.
The section lays down the inevitability of the approval of ACC by providing that notwithstanding anything contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law, no court shall take cognisance of any offence under the Money Laundering Prevention Act of 2012, except with the approval of the ACC.
The section also explicitly says that after concluding the investigation under this act, the investigation officer shall take prior approval of the ACC before submitting his/her report and shall submit a copy of the approval before the court along with the report.
Comments