BY MACC chief Azam Baki’s own admission that he had allowed his brother, Nasir to use his share trading account to buy millions of shares in two public-listed companies in 2015, there are reasons to suspect that offences were committed under the Securities Industry (Central Depositories) Act 1991 (Sicda).

Investigations by the Securities Commission (SC) should be under sections 25 (in the case of Nasir) and 29A (in the case of Azam) Sicda.

On January 6, the SC said that under section 25, every securities account with a central depository must be in the name of the beneficial owner of the deposited securities or an authorised nominee.

“In addition, section 29A Sicda stipulates that all dealings in securities shall be effected only by the beneficial owner of the securities or an authorised nominee,” said the SC. 

It is therefore curious that the SC should say that it “has concluded its enquiry and based on the evidence gathered, the SC is not able to conclusively establish that a breach under section 25(4) Sicda has occurred.” 

What about the inquiry relating to the issue of whether a breach under section 29A Sicda has occurred?

Allowing a person who is not an authorised nominee of a deposited security to effect dealings in respect of the deposited security is an offence under section 29A Sicda. 

The SC’s “Updates of Criminal Prosecution 2018” discloses that one Daniel Yong Chen-I was charged under section 29A Sicda. Daniel, who held an account at CIMB Investment Bank Bhd, was alleged to have allowed one Ng Ee Fang – his wife – to effect the acquisition of 1,000,000 units of Hirotako Holdings Bhd shares on October 14 to 20, 2011.

Yong was charged on March 13, 2018 over the share transactions. 

Azam’s admission is in respect of share transactions in 2015. His admission discloses reasonable suspicions of commission of offences under sections 29A Sicda and 25(4) Sicda. – January 19, 2022.

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight.