The Hon. M. Nizam Kariapper, PC

¶ 01 Hon. Presiding Member, it is a privilege to speak after Hon. Deputy Minister Arun Hemachandra, who has impressed me even in TV debates.

¶ 02 Hon. Deputy Minister, please do not say that about the entire Opposition. We have studied this Bill—the Proceeds of Crime Bill—substantially. In my view, it is virtually a copy of the UK statute. Your 100% success claim is not correct. I have done my research; I do not wish to argue here. My compliments to the Hon. Deputy Minister, a young rising star speaking in all three languages.

¶ 03 I do not speak against the Bill, but it is my duty to highlight its weaknesses. Having a law to vest proceeds of terrorism, fraud, and crime in the State is good. But do you know how many laws already exist for this? Penal Code Section 427; Bribery Act Section 23(a); the Prevention of Money Laundering Act provisions; the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act; the PTA; the Financial Transactions Reporting Act Sections 24–26; the Banking Act; Code of Criminal Procedure Sections 60, 61, 430, 431; and the Customs Ordinance. Plenty of laws exist. What happened? Were they used?

¶ 04 Let me cite an example. We speak of vesting proceeds of crime in the State. But when it comes to private property affected by crime, what happens? A village woman’s van was stolen. After great difficulty, Police recovered it. The case drags for ten years. Under Section 327 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the property should be returned; on bond it was released to her. Now she has cancer and wants to sell the van. Police say no—cases pending cannot be sold. She says, “I do not care even if the accused is acquitted. Please let me sell my van.” But nothing can be done.

¶ 05 The problem is not the absence of laws, but how they are implemented. Administering justice is not easy; there is an attitude problem in institutions dispensing justice. There are hundreds of such cases—private property caught up in criminal cases, lying idle.

¶ 06 We think bringing this Bill now will fix everything. But will you use it to bring back the stolen Central Bank Bond money (2015), to catch the masterminds of the Easter attacks, to recover from sugar tax fraudsters, irregularities at Lakvijaya Power Plant, the money spent on 96,000 MT of so-called “organic fertilizer,” and funds tied to Dubai containers? Nothing of that will happen. I will give you a year; then I will ask how much money you actually recovered under this law. This Act risks being redundant and ineffective in achieving what the people demand—recovery of stolen property, especially overseas.

¶ 07 Consider those four persons sanctioned by the UK; the UK can seize their assets under its POCA. A case on the Easter attacks is ongoing in the US. Can we, using this POCA, reach their assets abroad? This is not just legal gaps; our institutions are weak, under-resourced, and at times unwilling. Now comes this Bill promising fixes—it is not so simple.

¶ 08 You have two minutes left, Sir? Let me add a current issue: the tariff problem—really, Trump’s “tier” tariffs; someone called it on YouTube the “taka-thiru” taxes—has arisen. Speaking of Trump reminds me of our colleague Archchuna, who is not in the House.

¶ 09 Hon. Member Ramanathan Archchuna continuously criticizes Islam and Muslims. Maulavi Rasmin has publicly invited him to an evidence-based debate to refute his false claims. I hope Hon. Archchuna is listening. He will even get TV coverage as a reward if he takes part.

¶ 10 Finally on this Bill, I wish to flag three concerns to the Hon. Minister of Justice: first, it undermines the presumption of innocence; second, it has an indirect retrospective impact; third, it allows seizure of property even in civil transactions. Please consult the Attorney General and address these before passage. I conclude.

¶ 11 Thank you.