 |  |
|
By Crystal Chan
A MALAYSIAN businessman has not been able to touch a cent of nearly $500,000 in his Singapore bank accounts for almost two years.
His accounts were frozen by the authorities here after he was drawn into the protracted saga involving ex-Citiraya boss Ng Teck Lee, who has skipped town with US$51 million ($72m).
The fugitive had promised to pay Mr Ung Yoke Hooi, 44, who owns a business dealing in scrap metal and industrial waste, $4m for Mr Ung's 29 per cent stake in a Citiraya subsidiary.
And the frozen money was part of the $4m that was to have been paid in 10 instalments.
Believing that Ng had used ill-gotten proceeds to pay Mr Ung, the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) froze the latter's accounts in November 2006.
Unhappy by the delay in the probe, Mr Ung went to the High Court to seek an order for the CPIB to unlock two accounts in Standard Chartered Bank and one in DBS Bank.
The accounts held a total of $485,000.
But he has to wait longer as Justice Tay Yong Kwang turned down the request.
His lawyer, Mr Singa Retnam, has filed an appeal.
Mr Ung realised that he had been drawn into the scandal only when DBS told him in December 2006 that his account had been frozen by the CPIB.
'Unreasonable'
As he was neither charged nor investigated, he felt it was unreasonable of the CPIB to hold on to his money and wanted the court to rectify this.
In its defence, the CPIB, represented by the Attorney-General's Chambers, insisted that Mr Ung's frozen money was connected to Ng's misdeeds.
The A-G Chambers argued that it was reasonable to expect that the accounts would be frozen for some time as the case was complex and involved foreign banks and companies.
Investigations showed that the money that Ng paid to Mr Ung had come from Pan Asset International, a company registered in the British Virgin Islands.
It is the CPIB's case that Ng owns Pan Asset International and that it was used to receive the proceeds from his scam.
The A-G also argued that once Ng is brought back to Singapore, Mr Ung's accounts would no longer be frozen.
In his written judgment, Justice Tay pointed out that the Criminal Procedure Code allows the authorities to seize any property that is suspected to be stolen.
He wrote: 'Nothing in the code requires Mr Ung to be charged with any offence, be the subject of any investigation or to have knowledge that the property was stolen.
'On the contrary, all that is required is that the property is suspected to be stolen...'
While Mr Ung's lawyer argued that the CPIB had not proven that the money in the frozen accounts came from Pan Asset International, Justice Tay said the onus was on Mr Ung to show that the monies were not ill-gotten gains.
He also felt that there was no unnecessary delay in the release of the accounts as Ng's disappearance meant that the CPIB had to investigate the scam without his assistance.
While Mr Ung had claimed that the frozen accounts had inconvenienced him and his family, Justice Tay noted he had not produced any supporting evidence.
This story was first published in The New Paper on Aug 30, 2008.
No comments:
Post a Comment