This article first appeared in The Edge Malaysia Weekly on May 12, 2025 - May 18, 2025

SINCE news of her abduction a month ago broke last week, many questions have been asked about 42-year-old Datin Seri Pamela Ling Yueh: What has happened to her? And what was the motivation behind her disappearance?

Ling was on her way to meet the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) in Putrajaya when she was abducted from an e-hailing vehicle on April 9. She has not been heard from since. Her lawyers filed a police report on the same day but there have been no new leads on her whereabouts.

On April 7, two days before her abduction, Ling had sought an application for a judicial review against MACC and the director general of immigration.

The affidavit — seen by The Edge — filed in support of the judicial review sheds light on the events leading up to her kidnapping by a group allegedly posing as police officers.

In her application, Ling sought to quash a warrant of arrest issued by the Johor Bahru magistrate’s court against her on Dec 2, 2024. It is a declaration that MACC is not empowered to prohibit, directly or indirectly, a person from leaving Malaysia save in manners prescribed under law. She sought the return of two mobile phones seized by MACC, an order of mandamus against the director-general of immigration to allow her to leave Malaysia, and damages of S$20,401.14 (RM67,700) and RM70,000 for expenses incurred, among other reliefs.

According to the court documents, Ling and her husband, businessman Datuk Seri Thomas Hah Tiing Siu, were estranged and undergoing divorce proceedings, with allegations and accusations being hurled by both of them. While Ling had sought a divorce in the Singapore courts, Hah was seeking a divorce in Malaysian courts.

One of Hah’s businesses involved importing frozen poultry and beef. In her divorce proceedings in Singapore, Ling alleged that Hah had falsely declared his non-halal-certified meats as halal-certified, taking advantage of the lower import costs of non-halal products.

Central to the entire issue is Ling’s claim that in July 2023, her signature was forged on share transfer documents and extraordinary general meeting resolutions, resulting in more than half of her shareholding in Multi Galaxy Pte Ltd (formerly Joinland Group Pte Ltd) being “illegitimately transferred by Hah to himself”. Multi Galaxy’s primary business is renting out properties for profit.

In her judicial review application Ling says, “I verily believe that the true purpose of my arrest, remand and subsequent travel restriction was to put pressure on me to resolve my claims on matrimonial assets and other matters with Hah.”

In December 2023, Ling sought assistance from the Accounting and Corporate Regulatory Authority of Singapore, claiming that the transfer of shares in Multi Galaxy to Hah was invalid. She filed documents to correct the records and also lodged a report with the Singapore Police Force, accusing Hah of forging her signature to transfer her shares in Multi Galaxy to himself.

According to Ling’s judicial review, the Singapore Police had seized the documents bearing her alleged forged signature that transferred her shares to Hah, and submitted them for forensic analysis.

To regularise the Singapore government registry records and the affairs of Multi Galaxy and also because her employment permit was linked to the company, Ling initiated legal proceedings in October 2024 against Hah and company secretary Ho Man Leong, who facilitated the share transfer and Hah’s appointment as a director of Multi Galaxy.

According to Ling’s application for a judicial review, Hah had on Aug 25, 2024, applied to the Singapore court to stay the Multi Galaxy suit pending the conclusion of the Malaysian divorce proceedings, but his request was denied.

The court documents have her saying: “Hah was clearly concerned about the implications of his having forged the impugned documents and the possibility of my commencing legal proceedings in that regard.”

Ling also says, “I contend that Hah utilised MACC to seek to pressure me into resolving matters, including my complaint that Hah had forged my signature on the impugned documents.”

At the end of July 2024, three MACC officers approached Ling’s brother seeking her exact location, and her father, who was roped in by her brother, was told that the graft agency was looking to question Ling regarding her claim that Hah was importing non-halal-certified meat and presenting it as halal.

Ling claims that her father’s bank accounts in Malaysia were frozen in relation to investigations by MACC into his businesses, and he was told during meetings that MACC would drop their investigations into him if he could persuade Ling to transfer matrimonial assets to Hah. Ling did not agree.

In mid-October 2024, Ling was informed by an officer of the Singaporean Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) that she was required to attend a meeting with MACC on Oct 29, 2024, at the CPIB office.

Other than the halal meat and poultry issue, the MACC officers also questioned Ling on Sky Vantage Pte Ltd, which she claimed was a company managed by her father and that was under investigation in Malaysia as a middleman for the sale of diesel.

Ling had expressed her willingness to cooperate with MACC but requested that any meeting take place in Singapore or remotely, as two of her children had chronic medical conditions and were undergoing treatment in the city state.

The couple’s three children — a 20-year-old and 18-year-old twins — reside with Ling in Singapore.

According to her affidavit, the eldest was diagnosed as autistic (high-functioning) in 2006 and then diagnosed in 2022 with a rare life-threatening condition known as hereditary angioedema (HAE), which requires continuing medical treatment to prevent attacks. One of the twins had also been diagnosed as dyslexic.

“I was also concerned about the influence Hah had in Malaysia, which made me feel unsafe in Malaysia. This was not the first time I had expressed concerns about my safety and liberty if I travelled to Malaysia after Hah’s commencement of the Malaysia divorce proceedings,” Ling says.

Nevertheless, she was required to present herself at MACC’s office in Johor Bahru the following day, on Oct 30, 2024, to assist in an investigation into an offence. Ling did not comply.

Meanwhile, her father, who had been questioned by MACC about Sky Vantage, was issued an offer to compound by the agency, which he subsequently paid. It is not clear what the offence was.

In December 2024, MACC applied for and obtained a warrant from the Johor Bahru magistrate’s court as Ling had failed to comply with the order to go to MACC’s office in JB on Oct 30, 2024. The warrant stated that Ling was the owner of Sky Vantage.

Ling was handed over to MACC officials by the Singapore authorities at the Malaysia-Singapore immigration checkpoint. She was then taken in handcuffs to the MACC office in JB before being transferred to MACC Putrajaya.

According to her affidavit, Ling was arrested and informed that she might be charged under the Anti-Money Laundering (AMLA) Act.

“This was the first time I had been told of an alleged section 4(1)(a), AMLA offence,” Ling says.

She was produced before a magistrate on Jan 9, 2025, and remanded for a further three days to facilitate investigations, including her failure to attend the meeting at MACC JB as well as a money laundering offence in connection with a company called Ayam Kuat Maju Sdn Bhd.

Ayam Kuat Maju has since been renamed Joinland Maju Sdn Bhd, which is involved in investment holding, hiring of equipment, activities of holding companies, and rental and operational leasing of office machinery and equipment without operators, according to a search on the Companies Commission Malaysia (SSM) website.

 Hah is the sole director of Joinland Maju and has a direct 2.41% stake in the company while Joinland Holdings (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd, which is jointly owned by Ling’s brother and father, has 22.77% equity interest in Joinland Maju. Joinland Maju’s largest shareholder is Cymbeline Capital Ltd, with a 73.85% stake.

Following the remand order, Ling’s two mobile phones were confiscated by MACC and her statement was recorded. She was once again informed that she might be charged under AMLA.

“In the course of statement-taking, I was questioned on matters that had no bearing on [the charges] or the matters indicated at the Oct 29, 2024, meeting. In particular, I was questioned about Multi Galaxy, its assets and financial dealings,” she says.

On Jan 11, 2025, Ling was released on bail.

“Notwithstanding, and without any legal basis, MACC imposed conditions that I pay a sum of RM35,000 as a deposit and return to the MACC office on Feb 10, 2025. I was also instructed to return and report to MACC every month until the investigation was concluded.”

Travel restrictions were also imposed on Ling.

In her affidavit, she says: “The true purpose underlying this exercise came to light as follows, which points to MACC having exercised its powers for the collateral purpose of pressuring me into resolving matters with Hah.”

Ling says that, during a meeting with MACC officials on Jan 24, 2025, while waiting to give her statement, she was approached by Hah, who claimed that MACC officers had advised that the couple settle matters between themselves.

On Jan 27, 2025, Ling was required to undergo a polygraph test. “I verily believe that it was used to intimidate me,” she says. On Feb 14, 2025, she had sought to return to Singapore as her daughter had been admitted to hospital in Singapore because of her HAE diagnosis, but her request was refused.

There are many questions surrounding who kidnapped Ling and why. Despite her disappearance, lawyers confirm that her judicial review will proceed as scheduled by the court on May 19, 2025. 

Save by subscribing to us for your print and/or digital copy.

P/S: The Edge is also available on Apple's App Store and Android's Google Play.