M'sian Bar again challenges Najib pardon, this time over house arrest

M'sian Bar again challenges Najib pardon, this time over house arrest

Published: Sep 25, 2026 7:44 PM


Malaysian Bar intends to challenge the conditional pardon granted to former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak, arguing that there is no existing legal provision for a house arrest mechanism in Malaysia.

The challenge will be the second of its kind mounted by the Bar against Najib, with the legal profession body having previously sought a judicial review challenging the Federal Territories Pardons Board’s January 2024 decision to reduce Najib’s prison sentence and fine.

With the Court of Appeal set to deliver on Jan 27 next year its decision on the Bar’s appeal against the High Court’s refusal to grant it leave to challenge the first pardon, president Anand Raj affirmed that the Bar will be taking the latest conditional pardon to court.

“The Bar will, through its solicitors, challenge the decision and advice of the Pardons Board concerning the second pardon, while maintaining its appeal in relation to the board’s decision and advice on the first pardon,” he said in a statement today.


As part of the conditional pardon granted to Najib during a Sept 18 Pardons Board meeting, the former Umno president will have to pay a RM50 million fine before he is allowed to serve his remaining sentence under house arrest.

READ MORE: Najib gets house arrest - but how he'll be tracked remains unclear

Both the sentence and fine reduction, as well as the conditional pardon, concern Najib’s conviction over seven counts of criminal breach of trust, abuse of power, and money laundering involving over RM42 million belonging to SRC International.

The former premier is also appealing against the High Court’s guilty finding on four counts of abuse of power and 21 counts of money laundering involving RM2.3 billion linked to the 1MDB global financial scandal.


No SOP for house arrest

Anand said that from the Bar’s research to date, there appears to be no standard operating procedures or guidelines in place for house arrests, noting that a “whole new ecosystem of rules and procedures” would be required to operationalise such a mechanism.


Besides citing recent statements from Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail confirming the lack of such provisions, Anand also rebutted references to the case of Kenneth Lee Fook Mun, who was purportedly granted house arrest by way of a royal pardon.


“(Lee’s case) does not constitute legal authority nor justification for saying that Malaysia has a formal legal ‘house arrest’ framework. It is unclear if that case arose by way of a Pardons Board decision or under licence of the prisons’ commissioner general under Section 43 of the Prisons Act 1995.

“The case also does not appear to have been tested in court nor to have received any judicial endorsement - it therefore does not constitute a legal precedent for granting house arrest,” Anand said.

In January last year, Najib’s lawyer, Shafee Abdullah, said on a podcast that he had represented Lee, the grandson of Malaysia’s first finance minister Henry Lee Hau Shik, who allegedly went on to receive a house arrest order to serve his remaining sentence over a murder charge.

Donation drive under scrutiny

Anand also questioned the donation drive set up by Umno to collect the funds needed for Najib’s RM50 million fine.

“Given the reported return of the earlier RM114,164,393.44 to Najib’s representative, it is unclear why Umno needs to raise funds from the public. Such a public fundraiser may also involve other legal considerations,” he said.


The RM114 million figure refers to the value of seized cash and assets from a 2018 raid which was returned to Najib and Umno after prosecutors failed to forfeit the amount in a 1MDB-linked forfeiture suit.

Anand added that it is also “unclear” why Najib has claimed that most of his assets are frozen when it appears that “more than enough” of his previously seized assets have been returned to cover the RM50 million fine without the need for a public fundraiser.

“Perhaps there may be other assets (which were not seized circa May 2018) which may have been frozen, but this is not clear, nor have any details been made available publicly,” Anand said.

READ MORE: From Brunei to Italy, Najib's RM50m fine draws donors from far and wide, says Rosmah

He further said the Bar backs the joint statement issued earlier by civil society organisations and individuals, including former Bersih leaders Ambiga Sreenevasan and Maria Chin Abdullah.

Besides urging the Pardons Board and the Prime Minister’s Department to declassify and publish the Pardons Board’s official minutes on the meetings behind Najib’s first and second pardon, the Bar is also calling for the full disclosure of all conditions attached to Najib’s house arrest.

This, Anand said, includes monitoring protocols, enforcement authorities, and the additional costs to taxpayers that a potential house arrest would entail.