KUALA LUMPUR (Feb 15): The High Court has fixed April 18 to deliver its decision on i-Serve Online Mall Sdn Bhd's leave application for a judicial review challenging the freezing of several of its accounts by Bank Negara Malaysia (BNM) since last November.

The court on Tuesday (Feb 15) heard an objection by the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC) to the application on the grounds that the judicial review would be academic as the freeze orders issued since November last year had been superseded by new seizure orders made recently.

Lawyers for i-Serve Online, however, argued that the judicial review was still relevant considering that more than 30 accounts of the company and that of other applicants continued to be frozen.

Following this, Justice Datuk Wan Ahmad Farid Wan Salleh fixed April 18 to deliver his decision on whether or not to grant leave.

In judicial review cases, leave or permission has to be granted to ensure that the application is not frivolous, vexatious or an abuse of the court process.

Federal counsel M Kogilambigai appeared for the AGC, while i-Serve Online Mall and the other applicants were represented by Datuk DP Naban, Chetan Jethwani and Amiratu Al Amirat.

In mid-November last year, BNM issued a press release stating that 22 premises linked to i-Serve Online Mall and its related affiliates across Kuala Lumpur and Selangor had been raided in an operation led by the National Anti-Financial Crime Centre with BNM as the lead agency.

On Nov 18, i-Serve Online Mall issued a statement claiming BNM's press release was inaccurate. It is understood that i-Serve Online Mall has since issued a letter of demand against BNM for making a false and defamatory press release.

On Jan 26, i-Serve Online Mall, its shareholders Datuk Goh Hwan Hua and Boon Soon Heng, Goh's wife Datin Neow Ean Lee, i-Serve Technology & Vacations Sdn Bhd, Advance Digital Ventures Bhd and Trillion Cove Holdings Bhd filed the judicial review application against BNM and its officers, challenging the freeze order.

Goh said in his affidavit that BNM's action was tainted with mala fide (bad intention), illegality and an abuse of power.

In the judicial review application, i-Serve Online Mall named six respondents: BNM, the central bank's financial intelligence and enforcement department (FIED) director Mohd Fuad Arshad, FIED manager Sarah Syamimi Mohd Suhaimi, FIED officers Muhammad Banjumaswira Ishak and Maisarah Najla Mansor as well as the AGC's deputy public prosecutor Kamal Baharin Omar.

In late January, BNM issued a letter to lift the freezing of some 10 accounts related to i-Serve Online Mall and its affiliates, following the filing of its judicial review and a report that appeared on theedgemarkets.com on Jan 27.

When contacted by theedgemarkets.com, a spokesperson said i-Serve Online Mall had argued that BNM acted in bad faith when it granted the variation orders for only 10 accounts on the eve of the expiry of the freeze orders.

i-Serve Online Mall also argued that the law relating to freeze orders had changed and that parliament had enacted new Sections 44 and 44A to protect the rights of persons subject to freeze orders.

The AGC took the position that leave should not be granted on the basis that the investigative powers of BNM in the present matter was not amenable to judicial review and that the legal action was academic since the freeze orders had lapsed.

A freeze order made under the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activity Act 2001 (AMLATFPUA) shall cease to have effect after 90 days from the date of the order.

i-Serve Online Mall is also seeking a certiorari order to quash the freeze orders that BNM issued on Nov 11 last year under the AMLATFPUA's Section 44, and damages suffered in relation to the issuance of the orders.

theedgemarkets.com understands that BNM served on solicitors of i-Serve Online Mall the new seizure orders on Tuesday morning before the court hearing. The company spokesperson claimed that the new orders were backdated to Jan 28, which was not disclosed to the court earlier.

"It is an abuse of investigative powers when an enforcement agency, like BNM, having already frozen the companies' 45 business accounts for already three months, now wants to extend them for another nine months.

"BNM has not informed what else they needed whereas the plaintiffs have fully cooperated. It is irrational and perverse to kill a company in this manner especially in this post-pandemic economic recovery stage of the country," said the spokesperson, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Read also:
i-Serve Online Mall proceeds with judicial review bid as BNM unfreezes some accounts
i-Serve Online Mall and affiliates seek judicial review of BNM’s asset freeze orders
i-Serve Online Mall requests BNM to clarify 'factually incorrect' press statement on joint action enforcement
BNM raids i-Serve Online Mall, seizes cash and freezes accounts totalling RM118.7m