Convicted ex-prime minister Najib Razak’s recent “epic” victory in the Court of Appeal, where it was proven that the mysterious “royal addendum” from the previous king really did exist, has certainly set tongues wagging in the country!
Not surprisingly, his legal team led by its battle-hardened “hotshot” lead counsel Muhammad Shafee Abdullah has since “stepped on the gas” to make sure the disgraced former UMNO president will have his way, that is, to serve the rest of his sentence under “home detention.”
Shockingly, it was reported that in a recent podcast, Shafee even went as far as to openly “demand” for the immediate resignation of former Attorney-General (AG), and now Federal Court judge, Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh!
To some, this latest incident may epitomise the manner in which Najib’s quest for house arrest is being “bulldozed” through, raising concerns in addition to sparking suspicions on whether it had crossed the red line.
In fact, recently it was reported that Shafee had pointed out the addendum by the king allowing Najib to serve under house arrest may be unusual, but that it's not without precedent; as such, he cautioned those who wanted to keep the ex-PM behind bars not to “pull wool over the eyes of the public."
To prove his point, the acclaimed lawyer then cited a murder case that happened some 24 years ago where the convicted man, after receiving a royal pardon from the king, had his death sentence commuted to life imprisonment, and finally proceeded to serve the balance of his imprisonment from his home.
However, it must be said that the man was a diabetic patient suffering from a hypoglycemic episode “at the time” he killed the woman; he was then sentenced to death in 2005, but in 2008 was granted clemency by the king.
Significantly, it was also reported the man had apologized for “causing” the death of the victim and had even admitted his guilt; while Shafee himself had said it was only later that he was allowed to serve the rest of his life sentence at home so that he can take care of his sick, elderly father.
Now, what some may be prompted to ask is: does this event bear any resemblance at all to Najib's case?
So who exactly is pulling the wool over the eyes of the public…?
Anyway, Shafee then went on to highlight Section 43 of the Prisons Act 1995, which purportedly allows the Commissioner General of Prisons to release a prisoner on licence under certain conditions; again, what many may want to know is: what are those “certain conditions?”
Considering the severity of Najib's corruption-related cases, and being once labelled as a “national embarrassment”, will the jailed ex-PM meet those strict “certain conditions?”
Coming back to the royal addendum, Najib's lawyer had claimed that Terrirudin may have “misled” the court because as the AG he should have been aware of the document’s existence as it was addressed to him!
However, given the secrecy surrounding the royal addendum, won't some people tend to question whether a third party might have advised for the document to be directed to the AG - and not to the Pardons Board? And if so, won't it invite suspicion that it had to be someone who is very familiar with the law, and one who is aware that even a royal decree, if it's issued outside the jurisdiction of the board, may be deemed invalid?
So, were there “hidden hands” in the royal addendum saga…?
Interestingly, doesn't the idea of sending the addendum directly to the AG also raise suspicion as to why the need to bypass existing protocols? Was there an attempt to put the AG in a tight spot - knowing that if things hit a roadblock there will be someone to put the blame on?
Another suspicion lingering in the minds of some may be that: could there have been some form of “interference” relating to the “belated” addendum? After all, wasn't the palace silent for several months - and only recently did it furnish a letter to confirm its existence? What could have been the reason for the long lapse?
Incidentally, it is also no secret that Najib’s lawyers have been repeating the “mantra” that the king has the full power to grant pardon, which may prompt some to question if it was a preemptive move to influence public opinion!
Perhaps, it was all part of a broader strategy to eventually secure “full pardon” for the convict?
Nevertheless, recently another lawyer GK Ganesan had countered Shafee's opinion by explaining in detail that any decision made outside the Pardons Board is deemed void.
Do Najib's lawyers dare to confute GK Ganesan’s legal opinion “point by point?”
Meanwhile, on his controversial call to the new Federal Court judge to resign, Shafee contended that the proper course of action would have been for the latter to acknowledge the addendum’s existence and argue its legality instead of being perceived to be “concealing” it; but then again, while the former AG’s silence may be questionable, how can he be hiding the document when he had “forwarded” it to the new king?
Not mincing words, Shafee then went on to slam the former AG’s action as a “contemptuous criminal act” and that “in the face of his misconduct, he should resign immediately!"
In conclusion, while Najib's lawyers may be entitled to criticise the former AG for his alleged indiscretion, the public may also have the right to ask them if their own conduct has been blameless when dealing with their client’s numerous abuse of power, money laundering and other 1MDB-related cases?
In fact, in the eyes of many, isn't calling for an apex court judge's head to roll, a vicious attack on the country's judiciary itself? Can there be anything more “contemptuous" than that?
Main information source: FMT, Scoop, The Sun Malaysia (Pressreader), CNA, GKG Legal, Malay Mail and NST
JK Joseph 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 Newswav.
