CONTEMPORARY MEASURES FOR EFFECTIVE INTERNATIONAL
COOPERATION
Rabi’atul Khairunnisa Zofri*I.

INTRODUCTION

The significance and urgency of International Cooperation was greatly highlighted andemphasized to all State Parties in the United Nations Convention against Corruption 1 .
Coherently, the modus operandi in corruption is becoming even more challenging and diverse,
hence both enforcement agencies and prosecution agencies should engage in close cooperation
with their counterparts and possess the same stance in terms of exchanging information relatingto investigation and prosecution of corruption cases as well as to recover illicit proceeds ofcorruption from overseas.
In order to work effectively and efficiently to curb the ever-changing operations andforms of corruption, anti-corruption agencies from every country should emphasize a higher
level of understanding and collaboration, working hand in hand without any prejudice towards
the common goal of eradicating and wiping out corruption on a global scale. Cooperation andmutual work ethic should not be limited to formal means but should also be open to informalmeans; hence in order to enhance international or regional cooperation between lawenforcement agencies, State Parties are encouraged to enter into bilateral or multilateralagreements or have arrangements for direct cooperation between law enforcement agencies2.
International cooperation is important.
II. ANTI-CORRUPTION BUREAU (ACB) BRUNEI DARUSSALAM AND
MALAYSIAN ANTI-CORRUPTION COMMISION (MACC) MALAYSIA—BILATERAL COOPERATION NETWORK AND WORKING GROUP
A.

Bilateral Cooperation Network
The two anti-corruption agencies of Brunei Darussalam and Malaysia have formed abilateral cooperation network to resolve resistance and obstacles that occurred between the twostates during the course of work, especially when there is an issue of jurisdiction and power ofinvestigation. From 22 to 24 July 2002, the ACB Brunei Darussalam and the Anti-Corruption
Agency (ACA) Malaysia3 held the 1st Annual Bilateral Meeting in Brunei Darussalam, andduring the meeting the two agencies agreed to collaborate in the area of investigation,intelligence, law, prevention, inspection, and consultancy and training.

* Assistant Special Investigator, Anti-Corruption Bureau, Brunei Darussalam.
1Article 43-50, United Nations Convention against Corruption.
Article 48, United Nations Convention against Corruption.
3The ACA is known as the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) since 1 January 2009.
2

B.

Working Group
From 24 to 25 June 2003, the first meeting of the ‘Working Group’ (WG) was held in
Penang, Malaysia, and Terms of Reference for Mutual Assistance were developed between
MACC, Malaysia and ACB, Brunei.
The functions of the Working Group are as follows:i.

To act as a focal point ina. Receiving and coordinating requests for Mutual Assistanceb. Providing feedback on Mutual Assistanceii.

To organize discussion on mutual assistance when required, andiii.

To present an annual report for Bilateral Cooperation meeting between MACCand ACB

The types of assistance that can be rendered through the Working Group cover thefollowing scope:i.

Intelligence: Exchange of intelligence information, assistance on intelligencework, and tracking witnesses or subjects

ii.

Investigation: To keep a record of any person who has given a statement orassisted an investigation, recording a statement of a witness or subject,collection and delivery of documents or case exhibits, seizure, freezing andforfeiture of assets, delivery and execution of any orders in relation to anyoffences issued by authorities of both states, handing over of criminals, joint
operations and other cooperation agreed upon by both agencies.

III. BRUNEI DARUSSALAM – PARTY TO THE TREATY ON MUTUAL LEGALASSISTANCE IN CRIMINAL MATTERS
Brunei Darussalam is a party to the Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal
Matters. The legal framework for Mutual Legal Assistance (MLA) in Brunei Darussalam isprimarily provided for in the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Order 2005 (MACMO2005). Under the MACMO 2005, Brunei can make and comply with requests for assistance toobtain evidence, make arrangements for persons to give evidence or assist in investigations,confiscation of property, service of documents, identification and location of persons, searchand seizure, provision of documents or any other types of assistance not contrary to ourdomestic laws.
IV. CASE STUDY
A.

Case Overview
Information was received by the Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB) sometime in 2010
stating that one male had demanded money from a person caught by the Brunei Royal Customs
and Excise Department for illegally smuggling 86 cartons of contraband cigarettes from Miri,Sarawak, Malaysia through the Sungai Tujoh Immigration Control Post. The said money was
an inducement to reduce the number of cartons smuggled by a smuggler, hence lowering theamount of the compound duty.
B.

Investigation Findingsi.

Investigations by the ACB established that the subject of this case was Kharol Azmi
Bin Hj Kula, a male of Bruneian nationality who was unemployed during thealleged period. He was a former Examining Officer under the Royal Customs andExcise Department, and his service was terminated in 2007. In 2010, Kharol Azmi
was involved in several alleged fraud cases.

ii.

Investigation revealed that Kharol Azmi had contacted a smuggler on the pretext
that Kharol Azmi wanted to purchase cartons of cigarettes. Kharol Azmi and thesmuggler then arranged for meet ups; however, Kharol Azmi then tipped off theRoyal Customs and Excise Department which led to the arrest of the smuggler.

iii.

After the smuggler was arrested by the Royal Customs and Excise Department,
investigation by the ACB revealed that Kharol Azmi had used several different
lines to contact the smuggler and to impersonate a Customs Officer, a Prosecuting
Officer and an anonymous person who knew a Customs Officer could help tofalsify the number of cigarettes confiscated in order to get a lower compound duty
imposed by the court. Kharol Azmi then asked the smuggler to remit BND 2000
through a remittance service ‘Western Union’ addressed to a named individual.

iv.

On 10 March 2011, following the instruction of Kharol Azmi, the smugglerremitted BND 2,000 via Western Union to the name mentioned by Kharol Azmi.
With the assistance from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission, MACC(Miri Branch), through the ACB and MACC Working Group, it was revealed thatthe money had been withdrawn on the same day.

v.

Investigation by the ACB then revealed that the recipient of the BND 2,000
remitted by the smuggler is of Malaysian nationality.

vi.

Since Kharol Azmi was known to have dealt with a Malaysian and the evidence
showed that the money had been withdrawn from a bank account in Malaysia whichMACC has jurisdiction over, ACB sought assistance from MACC in order to obtain
information and evidence.

vii.

Collecting intelligence information and evidence gathering: Assistance from theMalaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC), Malaysia
 MACC conducted an investigation under Section 16 of the Malaysian AntiCorruption Act 20094.
 As a result of the investigation conducted by MACC, investigators were able:

4Section 16 of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Act 2009, “Accepting gratification as an inducement or reward for
doing or forbearing to do any act in relation to his principal affairs”.

i. To establish the identity and locate the recipient of money from Western
Union.
ii. To obtain a statement from the witness and obtain confirmation that thewitness had communicated with Kharol Azmi, which was supportedwith evidence such as text messages that showed instructions fromKharol Azmi to withdraw the money and the details relating to it, as well
as evidence to show the instruction from Kharol Azmi for the witness todeposit the money into Kharol Azmi’s bank account in CIMB, Malaysia.
iii. To assist the ACB to arrange and call several witnesses for taking
statements by ACB officers in MACC, Malaysia for the purpose of trial.
C.

Conviction in Court
Kharol Azmi was charged with one count under section 420 of the Penal Code forcheating by falsely representing himself as a customs prosecuting officer who had the power
to reduce the number of cigarettes that the smuggler would be charged for possession of
unexcisable goods and to hand over the customs investigation papers to the smuggler to dispose,and thereby dishonestly induced the said smuggler, so deceived, to deliver BND 2,000 byWestern Union money transfer to the Malaysian man.
Kharol Azmi pleaded guilty to the charge and a sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment
was imposed by the court. The court did not order Kharol Azmi to return the money since
Kharol Azmi had no means to pay. On 24 August 2013, when the sentencing was read, KharolAzmi was serving a 56-month prison sentence for another case for 4 offences under section
420 of the Penal Code, which were all committed in 2010. The 56-month sentence took effectfrom 26 March 2012.
V. CONCLUSIONThe bilateral agreement and cooperation between the agencies has strengthened theirrelationship, and it has produced fruitful and productive outcomes. The international
cooperation via the working group not only proved to be successful but beneficial to bothcountries. The success of this case may not have been achieved wholly if not for the cooperationand support contributed through this mutual agreement given by the Malaysian AntiCorruption Commission (MACC), without which the defendant would not have been brought
before the court. Hence the importance of close and resilient relationships, and understandingis imperative in producing such success and prominent results of two-way cooperation infighting and eradicating corruption for both countries.
It is to be noted that international cooperation is very important among agencies in order
to combat corruption, and one of the tools is having bilateral cooperation as shown in the actual
case ACB shared during this seminar. Due to the long-standing relationship between ACB andMACC, ACB is able to pursue seeking international cooperation through both formal andinformal means. This is made possible through the working group coalition and agreement incarrying out the best interests of both countries. It enables investigation officers involved tocommunicate and correspond with each other by simple phone calls, text messages, e-mail andeventually meeting in person. The flexibility and convenience of such means of working andcontacting, more importantly the assistance and commitment which is a means of international

cooperation efforts, has contributed to the success of this case. It is hoped the joint harmony
will be extended further to achieve a greater working inspiration that benefits both countries in
the objective and aim of zero corruption in the region.