Najib Razak’s lead counsel, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, has called on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Malay Rulers to carefully examine the High Court’s decision rejecting the former prime minister’s bid to serve his remaining jail term under house arrest, arguing that the ruling carries far-reaching constitutional implications.
Speaking after the court dismissed Najib’s application, Shafee said his client was deeply dissatisfied with the outcome, particularly because it involved the treatment of an alleged addendum linked to royal clemency. According to him, the ruling effectively curtailed what he described as the full scope of discretionary powers traditionally vested in the Agong, as well as in the Malay Rulers and state governors.
Shafee contended that the High Court’s interpretation suggested that any decision related to clemency or pardon must strictly originate from and be formalised through the Pardons Board. In his view, this interpretation narrowed the constitutional role of the Agong by confining royal discretion within procedural limits that he believed were not intended by the Federal Constitution.
He further argued that such an approach risked diluting royal authority, as it framed the Agong’s powers as dependent on the Pardons Board rather than recognising a broader prerogative in matters of mercy. Shafee maintained that this reading of the law could undermine long-standing constitutional understandings of the monarchy’s role in pardon-related decisions.
The lawyer also expressed concern that the ruling could open the door for future legal challenges by other convicted individuals. He suggested that inmates who had previously sought clemency might now feel encouraged to question the internal processes of Pardons Board deliberations, potentially drawing the courts into matters traditionally treated as confidential.
The High Court, however, ruled that the alleged addendum authorising house arrest could not be enforced because it was not made during a formal Pardons Board meeting, as required under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution. The court emphasised that Malaysia’s monarch functions as a constitutional ruler, meaning that the exercise of royal powers must comply with constitutional safeguards and established legal procedures.
Shafee acknowledged the court’s reasoning but maintained that the implications of the decision extended beyond Najib’s personal case. He stressed that the ruling touched on the broader balance of power between the judiciary and the monarchy, particularly in areas involving mercy and clemency.
In light of this, Shafee urged the Agong, the Malay Rulers and state governors to scrutinise the judgment closely. He warned that the decision could have lasting consequences on how royal powers are interpreted and exercised in the future, making it an issue of constitutional significance rather than merely a legal setback for one individual.
Najib will remain at Kajang Prison following the rejection of his house arrest bid, while debates over the scope of royal prerogative and constitutional limits are expected to continue.
Kamran (kfiverr21@gmail.com) is a content creator under the Newswav Creator programme, where you get to express yourself, be a citizen journalist, and at the same time monetize your content & reach millions of users on Newswav. Log in to creator.newswav.com and become a Newswav Creator now!
The User Content (as defined on Newswav Terms of Use) above including the views expressed and media (pictures, videos, citations etc) were submitted & posted by the author. Newswav is solely an aggregation platform that hosts the User Content. If you have any questions about the content, copyright or other issues of the work, please contact creator@newswav.com.