CID Chief's Bank Account Was Frozen By Australian Authorities. Here's All You Need To Know

This was revealed by Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) in a report published on 2 March.

"One week after the decorated public official concluded an Australian trip in 2016, the account received a flurry of suspicious cash deposits.

"The account balance grew by nearly AUD290,000 in a month, mostly in structured deposits below AUD10,000, the threshold above which law enforcement agencies receive mandatory notifications," SMH wrote in its report.

It was reported that the bank account which has about AUD320,000 (about RM970,000) was frozen after the Australian Federal Police (AFP) filed a freezing and forfeiture application with the New South Wales Supreme Court and won it last March.

Here's a brief timeline of key events leading up to the account being frozen, according to SMH's report:

• 2011 to 2012: Wan Ahmad made three visits to Australia between this period of time, declaring AUD112,000 to Australian customs. In one of these visits, he opened an account in his own name at the Commonwealth Bank’s Haymarket branch in Sydney's CBD.

• December 2012: AUD30,000 was deposited into the account from three different location, one day after Wan Ahmad arrived in Australia. A sum of AUD8,000 was also withdrawn from the same account.

• September 2016: The account lay dormant for several years until September 2016, when cash was deposited into the account from five different states. This was just six days after Wan Ahmad's final trip to Australia in recent years.

• March 2017: The AFP won a forfeiture order, in which it prevents a person from accessing funds held in a bank account.

The SMH report cited assistant director of the Royal Malaysian Police (PDRM) integrity department, Allaudeen Abdul Majid, who said that an internal investigation was conducted and findings from the probe found that the funds were lawfully obtained from the sale of a house for his children's education.

It was learned that Wan Ahmad had entrusted the fund to a close friend, Seenisirajudeen Mohamad Basith, an Indian national who has since returned to India, to make the cash transfer into the said bank account in Australia.

"Unknown to Dato' Sri Wan Ahmad Najmuddin Bin Mohd, the money was transferred without compliance to Australian laws. The whole episode was an oversight. No malice was intended to break any laws including Australia's," Allaudeen wrote, as reported by SMH.

Following the report by SMH, both Inspector-General of Police (IGP) Tan Sri Mohamad Fuzi Harun and Deputy Inspector-General of Police Tan Sri Noor Rashid Ibrahim, have issued statements saying that local authorities found no wrongdoing in the case.

"We did our own internal checks and discovered that the amount was obtained through a sale of a house in Shah Alam in 2016. Based on our own investigation, there was no wrongdoing or malice discovered," Noor Rashid told The Star Online when contacted last Friday, 2 March.

It was learned that the findings from the investigations by the Malaysian authorities were also submitted to the Australian authorities, one week before the AFP won a forfeiture order.

TheSun reported MACC deputy chief commissioner (operations) Datuk Seri Azam Baki as saying that an investigation will be initiated provided that there are evidence of wrongdoing. 

"It (the police integrity department) has taken the necessary steps to determine this and they should know the case better. We have to be fair to him (Wan Ahmad) too. However, we have read the article (by the Australian media) which comes from an open source and have taken note of all the information given to us.

"We will look into it if a complaint which is viable for us to investigate is lodged with us. Of course we need evidence, then we need to liaise with the Australian authorities if an investigation is decided. So far there has been no party that has come forward," Azam Baki was quoted as saying.

Segambut MP Lim Lip Eng issued a statement questioning why there was no effort on Wan Ahmad's part to reclaim the hard-earned money for his children's education from the Australian government.

"Why did he (Wan Ahmad) choose to lose a total of AUD320,000 instead of getting the services of a 'no cure, no pay' lawyer there to claim the money?" he asked in his statement that was published on DAP's website.

"He should have no problem getting such a lawyer if he can agree to pay 50% or more of the AUD320,000 amount for legal fees, after successfully recovering the money. Perhaps he has more money in other overseas accounts, and the loss of AUD320,000 does not directly threaten his children's education plan?" Lim added. 

Bernama reported Nur Jazlan as saying that the Australian authorities should have taken action against Wan Ahmad instead of resorting to disclosing information to their local media if the latter was guilty of any wrongdoing. 

"I have no idea why the Australian government had done so (revealed information via the media). If this was a crime involving money laundering, take action (against the CID director).

"However, that was not the case. They only used the media to embarrass Malaysia," he was quoted as saying.