SINGAPORE Trends and Developments Contributed by: Jansen Chow and Ang Leong Hao, Rajah & Tann Singapore LLP
they are being scammed. This is a welcome development as it promises a much speedier way of preventing dissipation of assets, at least on an interim basis, while the fraud victim races to court to seek a freezing injunction. Anti-Money Laundering and Other Matters Bill On 6 August 2024, the Singapore Parliament passed the Anti-Money Laundering and Other Matters Bill, which grants law enforcement agen - cies greater power to combat money laundering. As highlighted during the parliamentary debates, the law previously required the prosecution to establish that the funds allegedly laundered in Singapore were directly traceable to a specific criminal offence. This created challenges, par - ticularly where the underlying offence occurred abroad, as the prosecution had to demonstrate an unbroken chain of transactions linking the illicit funds from the commission of the offence all the way to their eventual deposit with the alleged money launderer. With the introduction of this new Bill, amongst other things, the prosecution is no longer required to establish a direct connection between the criminal conduct and the funds allegedly laun - dered in Singapore. Instead, it would be suffi - cient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused knew, or had reasonable grounds to suspect, that they were handling the proceeds of crime. This legislative change will likely make it easier to prosecute money mules, especially in cases where the illicit funds have been routed through multiple bank accounts and intermedi - aries across foreign jurisdictions before arriving in Singapore.
Prior to the Bill, law enforcement agencies who wished to seek a court order to sell a seized or restrained property under the Criminal Pro - cedure Code 2010 had to obtain the consent of all parties involved. However, with the new Bill, courts may order the sale of a seized or restrained property without the consent of all parties involved if certain requirements are met. As noted by the Parliament, this amendment will reduce the cost of property maintenance by law enforcement agencies and also improve subse - quent asset recovery and restitution to victims. Conclusion The past year has seen significant developments in Singapore’s legal landscape concerning fraud and asset recovery, particularly in the realm of cryptocurrency assets as well as legislative changes. The decisions in Cheong Jun Yoong v Three Arrows Capital Ltd and Others and Fan - tom Foundation Ltd v Multichain Foundation Ltd and Another have laid down the framework for further development of the legal issues concern - ing the location and valuation of cryptocurrency assets. Meanwhile, the Protection from Scams Bill and the Anti-Money Laundering and Other Matters Bill introduced robust measures to pre - vent scams and improve law enforcement agen - cies’ powers in combating money laundering. These trends underscore Singapore’s commit - ment to maintaining its status as a global finan - cial hub and protecting individuals from financial harm.
318 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook