ATTORNEY General Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar has moved to clarify growing public concerns over corruption suspects being discharged after paying compounds, stressing that such settlements are expressly provided for under Malaysian law and are only approved after careful legal consideration.
His remarks follow criticism and questions surrounding several high-profile cases in which individuals facing corruption charges were released after settling compound offers issued by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC).
According to Mohd Dusuki, compound offers are made pursuant to Section 92(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (AMLATFPUAA 2001), and only after authorities have thoroughly assessed the facts of a case and representations submitted by defence counsel.
Explaining one recent case involving an individual charged in May under Section 17(a) of the MACC Act 2009, with an alternative charge under Section 165 of the Penal Code, Mohd Dusuki outlined the legal process that led to the withdrawal of the prosecution.
"On May 7, 2026, the accused was offered a compound by the MACC under Section 92(1) of AMLATFPUAA 2001 before completing payment of the compound on May 12, 2026.
"After the accused completed payment of the compound offered, pursuant to Section 92(4) of AMLATFPUAA, the accused could no longer be charged again for the same matter.
"Accordingly, the principal charge under Section 17(a) of the MACC Act 2009 and the alternative charge under Section 165 of the Penal Code were applied to be withdrawn. Following that, the court ordered that the accused be discharged and acquitted," he told Berita Harian.
The Attorney General emphasised that Section 92(1) grants enforcement agencies or relevant authorities, with the consent of the Public Prosecutor, the power to offer compounds to individuals or entities as a means of resolving cases without prolonged court proceedings.
Under the legislation, the amount imposed through a compound cannot exceed 50 per cent of the maximum fine prescribed upon conviction for the offence concerned, including any applicable daily penalties.
Mohd Dusuki further noted that Section 92(4) contains a clear legal safeguard preventing further prosecution once a compound has been accepted and paid.
The provision states that where an offence has been compounded under subsection (1), no prosecution may subsequently be instituted against the person who was offered and has paid the compound in respect of the same offence.
The clarification comes amid heightened scrutiny over the practice after several corruption-related prosecutions were discontinued following compound payments.
In August last year, the Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court discharged and acquitted Adam Radlan Adam Muhammad, Deputy Chief of Bersatu's Segambut division, from 12 corruption and money laundering charges linked to the Jana Wibawa project after he paid a RM4.1 million compound.
More recently, a former corporate communications unit chief at a government ministry was discharged and acquitted of a charge involving the receipt of RM5,268 in gratification approximately three years ago after accepting and paying a compound offered by the MACC.
The Kuala Lumpur Sessions Court was informed by MACC prosecuting officer A. Selvam that Nur Fazreen Mohamad Kamal, 45, had completed payment of the compound following representations submitted by her legal counsel to the prosecution.
Mohd Dusuki's explanation underscores the government's position that compound settlements in eligible cases are not discretionary departures from the law but legal mechanisms specifically provided for under AMLATFPUAA, with payment carrying the consequence of permanently barring prosecution for the same offence. - June 10, 2026
.jpeg)
.jpg)
