Appeals Court affirms doctor's jail term for money laundering, abetting to commit forgery

Dr Hamimah Idruss is the first individual to be charged under the Anti-Money Laundering (AMLA) Act 2001.

In his judgment dated March 2, Court of Appeal Judge P. Ravinthran said the court found no appealable error in the judgment of the Sessions Court and the High Court.

“We find the convictions on all charges to be safe,” he said.

Ravinthran said the court, however, substituted the sum of RM6,394,530.72 with RM6,350,000 that Dr Hamimah was liable to pay as the pecuniary penalty in default one year jail.

Earlier in February, a three-member bench comprising Datuk Yaacob Md Sam, Datuk Zabariah Mohd Yusof and Ravinthran dismissed Dr Hamimah's appeal against her conviction and jail sentence.

Dr Hamimah was convicted by the Sessions Court on March 21, 2012, of 18 charges, 10 of which were for abetment to commit forgery for the purpose of cheating and eight charges for money laundering.

She was sentenced to one-year jail for each of the eight counts of money laundering and three years’ jail each for 10 counts of abetting to commit forgery. The court also ordered the sentences to run concurrently.

Dr Hamimah, a former director of Safire Pharmaceuticals (M) Sdn Bhd, was charged under Section 4(1) of the AMLA for receiving RM41.33 million in illegal gains between June 3 and 10, 2003.

She was also charged with 10 counts of abetting her staff Yusaini Wan Abi Sabian to falsifying 10 agreements under Safire Pharmaceuticals worth RM4.56 million, each under section 109 of the Penal Code.

Dr Hamimah lost her appeal in the High Court which upheld the decision of the Sessions Court.

In his judgment, Ravinthran said the court was of the view that having regard to the amount of money involved and the degree of culpability on the part of the appellant (Dr Hamimah), the punishment imposed cannot be regarded in any way as excessive.

“We find that the sentence of imprisonment imposed by the Sessions Court is reasonable having regard to the circumstances of the case,” he said.

The judge said the court found no merits in the defence submission that the prosecution did not call certain witnesses, including witnesses from overseas to prove the exact “money trail” through which the funds reached the shores of Malaysia.

“Local bank officers testified that the funds in question were ultimately routed to Malaysia through Goodrich Overseas Group of Hong Kong into bank accounts in Malaysia controlled by Hendry Toon and the appellant.

“Furthermore, the prosecution proved that the monies routed to Malaysia were proceeds of “unlawful activity” and that the appellant knowingly received a substantial part of the proceeds to redeem the debts of a company partially owned by her,” Ravinthran said.

Dr Hamimah was represented by lawyer Harvinderjit Singh, while deputy public prosecutor Datuk Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar appeared for the prosecution.