KUALA LUMPUR — The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) has clarified that the withdrawal of 26 money-laundering charges against businessman Liow Soon Hee, better known as Nicky Liow, followed his agreement to pay a RM10 million compound, as well as the forfeiture of bonds and seized assets.
The explanation came after several civil society organisations (CSOs) called on Attorney-General Tan Sri Dusuki Mokhtar to explain why the prosecution against Liow, involving alleged money laundering offences exceeding RM36 million, was discontinued.
In a statement today, the AGC stressed that Liow was not released without legal action, saying he had been charged with 26 offences under Section 4 of the Anti-Money Laundering, Anti-Terrorism Financing and Proceeds of Unlawful Activities Act 2001 (Act 613) at the Shah Alam Sessions Court on April 12, 2022.
The AGC said Liow, through his lawyers from Messrs Rajpal, Firah & Vishnu, submitted representation letters dated Dec 15, 2022 and April 6, 2023, seeking for all 26 charges to be compounded under Section 92 of Act 613.
“The representation letters submitted by Nicky Liow’s side have been examined and reviewed in detail,” the AGC said.
“Based on the overall available statements, and based on the prosecution’s assessment and consideration, this office agreed to offer a compound amounting to RM10,000,000.00 (RM10 million).”
The compound was agreed to by Liow and paid on May 29, 2023, it said.
The AGC added that the settlement also included the forfeiture of a bond amounting to RM647,366 and the forfeiture of seized assets.
Following the payment of the compound, the AGC said it withdrew the charges against Liow in accordance with Section 92 of Act 613.
On June 15, 2023, the Shah Alam Sessions Court ordered Liow to be released and discharged from all charges.
The AGC said the decision was consistent with the powers and discretion of the Attorney-General under the Federal Constitution and relevant laws.
It stressed that the decision was made based on information obtained from the overall investigation findings, without being influenced by external pressure or public sentiment.
“The decision taken was consistent with the powers and discretion of the Attorney-General under the Federal Constitution and relevant laws,” the AGC said.
“It was also carried out according to the provisions of the law based on information from the overall investigation results without being influenced by external pressure or public sentiment, while taking into account the integrity of the prosecution process and the need to ensure fairness in the criminal justice system.”
The CSOs had questioned why the charges against Liow were discontinued more than three years after he was granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA), saying the public had a right to know the reasons behind the decision.
They said the issue was not merely the outcome of the case, but the transparency surrounding the exercise of prosecutorial discretion.
The groups argued that the public should know what considerations led to the acceptance of Liow’s representation, whether the charges could be reinstated, and why a high-profile money-laundering prosecution was discontinued.
They also called for clearer safeguards governing prosecutorial decisions, including statutory guidelines, mandatory written reasons for discontinuing high-profile cases and annual reporting on discontinued prosecutions.
The CSOs said the separation of the Attorney-General and Public Prosecutor roles alone would not be sufficient without mechanisms to ensure transparency and accountability in the exercise of prosecutorial powers.
They maintained that reforms must address not only who holds prosecutorial authority, but also how such decisions are made, explained and reviewed. – August 7, 2026