The legal drama surrounding Dato' Seri Najib Razak's claim of a royal addendum allowing him to serve his prison sentence under house arrest has taken a new twist.
Speaking on the 'Trick Lama' podcast as reported in Scoop portal, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, Najib’s lawyer, has demanded the resignation of Federal Court judge Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Salleh, accusing him of misleading the judiciary by suppressing crucial information about the addendum as former Attorney-General.
The Attorney-General (AG) and the Pardons Board’s silence appears to be a respectful gesture towards the monarchy.
It is plausible that there was no case to begin with, as the alleged "house arrest" arrangement was never deliberated during the Pardons Board meeting and furthermore, there is no law for house arrest yet. The addendum introduced outside the board's jurisdiction, it raises questions about its legitimacy for it to be revealed to the public.
Was There a Case at All?
The AG’s silence during judicial proceedings could be interpreted as an admission that the addendum lacked the necessary legal foundation. If the purported order was not part of the original Pardons Board agenda, how could it hold any weight in Najib's case?
This omission could explain why the High Court dismissed Najib's judicial review application in April 2024, ruling that the addendum was "hearsay."
A Neutrality Masked in Silence
Another dimension to this saga is the involvement of the monarchy. It is understandable that the AG, Pardons Board, and government may have chosen silence to avoid appearing disrespectful to the monarchy. However, this attempt at neutrality, while respecting royal institutions, risks undermining the government’s transparency. In this case, silence appears to have done more harm than good, providing Najib's supporters, sympathizers and legal team in creating an impression of complicity, negligence and betrayal.
Shafee’s Bold Claims
Shafee’s demand for Terrirudin’s resignation is rooted in his assertion that the AGC failed its duty by not acknowledging the existence of the royal addendum.
Whether or not the addendum was legally binding, the AG should have disclosed it and allowed the courts to determine its validity. Instead, the lack of transparency has left the public and legal community questioning the motivations behind such omissions.
Procedural Gaps and Silence Undermine Justice
This case highlights the precarious intersection of law, politics, and monarchy in Malaysia.
The lack of deliberation by the Pardons Board on the addendum suggests procedural shortcomings. Furthermore, the silence of key institutions, while likely aimed at maintaining decorum, has inadvertently eroded public trust in the legal system.
Najib’s case is no ordinary legal battle; it carries profound implications for Malaysia’s governance, public trust, and institutional credibility. Silence may have been intended as a neutral stance, but in the realm of justice, silence can often be interpreted as contempt of justice. Institutions entrusted with upholding the law must act transparently, regardless of the parties involved.
Closing Thoughts
Whether Najib’s claim of a royal addendum is valid or not, the handling of this case has exposed cracks in Malaysia’s legal and political framework.
Had the AG, Pardons Board, and Government been more transparent in revealing the legitimacy of the 'House Arrest' addendum based on the Pardons Board’s jurisdiction, protocol, and existing laws, this case might have been resolved against Najib based on the Pardons Board’s decision and existing laws, rather than on 'hearsay'.
The AGC and Pardons Board must address these allegations head-on to restore public confidence. As Shafee insists on accountability, the question remains: will silence continue to define this controversy, or will justice finally prevail for or against Najib?
By: Kpost
Information Source:
Kpost 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.
