PUTRAJAYA: The Attorney-General’s Chambers (A-GC) has dismissed claims that the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s dismissal of Datuk Seri Najib Razak‘s judicial review application regarding an alleged house arrest addendum order had curtailed the powers of the King, the Malay Rulers, and state governors in matters of pardon.
Referring to several news reports quoting Najib’s lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, as alleging that the ruling had curtailed the prerogative powers, the A-GC described the claim as entirely untrue and said it did not reflect the actual reasoning of the High Court in rejecting the former prime minister’s application.
In a statement, the A-GC said the High Court, in dismissing Najib’s application, had reaffirmed that the power of pardon is a prerogative of the King, as guaranteed under Article 42(1) of the Federal Constitution, consistent with established precedents of the superior courts.
The statement explained that Article 42 also provides that in exercising this prerogative, the King, the Malay Rulers, and the governors must convene together with the Pardons Board when deciding pardon applications.
“In Najib’s case, the minutes of the 61st meeting of the Pardons Board for the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan, and Putrajaya clearly show that the issue of house arrest was never discussed nor ordered by the 16th King during the meeting.
“The meeting only considered Najib’s application for a full pardon, and the order made by the 16th King at that time was solely to reduce the term of imprisonment and the fine by 50 per cent.
“As such, the High Court judge ruled that any purported additional order for house arrest was not made pursuant to Article 42 of the constitution, as the matter was neither discussed by the board nor decided by the 16th King during the same meeting.
“This clearly shows that the High Court’s decision did not undermine the powers of the King, the Malay Rulers, or governors in granting pardons.
“Moreover, the judge in the written judgment had recognised the prerogative powers of the King, the Malay Rulers and governors, which cannot be exercised by any other party,” said the statement.
It said that in line with the concept of a constitutional monarchy, the power of pardon must be exercised in accordance with the conditions set out under Article 42 of the constitution.
“In this regard, the decision of the High Court has explained in detail the course of authority of the King, the Malay Rulers and governors in deciding on a pardon, thereby strengthening and affirming the powers of the royal institution, particularly in matters relating to applications for clemency,” it said.
The A-GC also cautioned against attempts to incite or disrupt public order through misleading interpretations of the court’s judgment, calling such actions inappropriate.
“All parties should respect the appeal process that has been initiated by Najib,” it said, reiterating its commitment to defend the royal institution and uphold the constitution.
Yesterday, Shafee had claimed that the High Court’s dismissal of Najib’s bid for house arrest had “diluted the powers” and undermined the full prerogative of mercy vested not only in the King, but also in the Malay Rulers and state governors.
He argued that the decision restricted the King’s latitude to make a pardon unless done in consultation with the Pardons Board.
© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd
