5 days ago
- Business
- Free Malaysia Today
MACC seizes Ilham Tower again
Ilham Tower belongs to former finance minister, the late Daim Zainuddin, and his family. (Website pic)
PETALING JAYA : The Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has seized the 274m-tall Ilham Tower, located in the Kuala Lumpur city centre.
This is the anti-graft agency's second time seizing the tower, after making a similar seizure on Dec 21, 2023.
In a statement, MACC said it received authorisation from the deputy public prosecutor to seize the tower on Jalan Binjai today.
The tower, which belongs to the late former finance minister Daim Zainuddin and his family, was seized two years ago under Section 38(1) of the MACC Act, which deals with the seizure of immovable property.
The anti-graft agency previously said it could seize the tower for up to 18 months pending investigations.
MACC said today's seizure was made under Section 51(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Amla).
It said the authorisation for seizure was granted after the deputy public prosecutor was satisfied that it was related to an offence under Section 4(1) of Amla for structuring transactions to evade reporting requirements.
'Accordingly, it was ordered that the Ilham Tower building be seized by an MACC investigating officer.
'All dealings involving the transfer of ownership of the said immovable property are now prohibited. Failure to comply with this notice constitutes an offence under Amla,' MACC said.
Last month, the graft busters opened eight new investigation papers into 'high-value' assets linked to Daim and his family members after receiving new information from overseas.
Earlier this week, the Kuala Lumpur High Court granted MACC a court order to freeze 132 million pounds (RM758.2 million) worth of assets in London belonging to Naimah Khalid, the widow of Daim, and her family.
The assets reportedly included two commercial buildings, five luxury residences and one bank account.
Naimah plans to challenge the court order, which was granted ex parte, contending that the assets were lawfully acquired.
