Trending Now
25 March 2023. Saturday
(March 24): Former Goldman Sachs Group Inc banker Roger Ng, who was sentenced to 10 years in prison for his role in the global 1MDB fraud, was ordered to forfeit US$35.1 million by a judge who rejected his claims that Malaysia already took all of his money.
At his March 9 sentencing, federal prosecutors had asked US District Judge Margo Brodie in Brooklyn, New York, to order Ng to forfeit the sum as ill-gotten gains from the conspiracy to loot the Malaysian sovereign wealth fund. Ng’s lawyer, Marc Agnifilo, argued that no other penalties were needed because his client had no funds left.
Brodie declined, at the time, to immediately order forfeiture. But on Friday she said that under the law she is required to impose the penalty, and said the amount “is not constitutionally excessive.”
Agnifilo didn’t immediately return an email seeking comment on the judge’s order.
Ng, a 51-year-old Malaysian national, was convicted of conspiring to violate US anti-bribery laws and taking part in a money-laundering scheme. His former Goldman boss and 1MDB co-conspirator, Tim Leissner, previously pleaded guilty and was the government’s star witness against Ng. He is scheduled to be sentenced in September.
While Ng argued he was less culpable than Leissner or Jho Low, the Malaysian financier who the US said masterminded the fraud, Brodie rejected his arguments, saying he “willfully engaged” in the multibillion-dollar scheme.
“Even if Ng is less responsible than the others charged with similar offenses, he played a role in one of the largest financial crimes of all time,” she said in her ruling. “The scheme resulted in enormous tangible harm, i.e., the theft of US$3 billion, and intangible harm to the confidence in democracy and government.”
Agnifilo had argued that Malaysian authorities had seized all of Ng’s assets and accounts and those of family members before he was arrested on US charges in late 2018.
Brodie turned down that argument.
“Ng has failed to show that forfeiture would destroy his future livelihood,” the judge said. “The fact that he already paid a large sum to the Malaysian government does not, on its own, render the forfeiture amount constitutionally excessive.”
