KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court’s decision in the case involving former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak and the royal addendum issue does not in any way affect or limit the power of royal pardon as enshrined in Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
Senior lecturer at the Faculty of Law at Universiti Teknologi Mara, Dr Ikmal Hisham Md Tah, said the widespread perception on social media that the court’s decision reduces the prerogatives of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is incorrect and stems from a misunderstanding of the judgment.
“The High Court is clearly of the view that the power of royal pardon remains fully intact under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
“Therefore, the claim that this power has been reduced is baseless.
“The statement by the Attorney-General’s Chambers, which asserts that the matter is legally sound, is correct from a legal perspective and effectively refutes the misunderstanding that certain parties are attempting to create,” he said.
Commenting on the frequent comparison between Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s full pardon in 2018 and Najib’s pardon application, Ikmal said both cases went through the process under the Pardons Board as provided for in the Constitution.
“The similarity is that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s decision in both cases was made through the Pardons Board.
“However, the key difference in Najib’s case is the existence of an addendum, which is said to have been issued outside the proceedings of the Pardons Board meeting.
“In contrast, Anwar‘s full pardon was made and decided during the Pardons Board meeting on May 16, 2018, thereby rendering it final from a legal perspective,” he said.
Ikmal said that based on the latest High Court ruling, any decree or decision relating to a pardon must be made during a meeting of the Pardons Board.
“If the royal addendum was made outside such a meeting, it is invalid and may be annulled by the court. That is the current legal position based on the High Court’s judgment delivered on Dec 22.
“Anwar‘s pardon was previously challenged by lawyer Mohd Khairul Azam Abdul Aziz, but the court ruled that the matter was non-justiciable because the decision was made during a meeting of the Pardons Board,” he said.
He said that in Najib’s case, the central issue was the allegation that the royal addendum was issued outside the Pardons Board, making it subject to judicial review.
“The High Court’s decision is also consistent with the precedent set by the Federal Court last August, when the case was remitted for retrial.
“The Federal Court took the view that the exercise of the power of pardon is subject to the procedures set out under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution, including matters relating to the royal addendum.”
Meanwhile, Ikmal described the comparison between the cases of Anwar and Najib circulating on social media as misleading.
“The comparison was made unfairly and hastily due to a failure to understand the pardon procedure under Article 42, coupled with political sentiment and bigotry towards leaders.
“A proper understanding of court decisions, the concept of a constitutional monarchy and the rule of law is essential to ensure that the supremacy of the Federal Constitution continues to be upheld by all Malaysians,” he said.
Najib will remain in Kajang Prison to complete his jail sentence for misappropriating RM42 million from SRC International Sdn Bhd.
High Court judge Alice Loke on Monday dismissed the judicial review application to enforce an alleged royal addendum that would have allowed him to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest.
© New Straits Times Press (M) Bhd
