Why govt concealing royal addendum's existence, asks Najib's lawyer
Published: Apr 17, 2024 1:16 PM
Najib Abdul Razak's lead counsel has demanded the government explain why it is allegedly concealing the existence of a royal supplementary order allowing the former premier to serve the rest of his jail sentence under house arrest.
Muhammad Shafee Abdullah told the media outside the Kuala Lumpur High Court this afternoon that he received no response to the letters he sent to multiple ministers seeking confirmation of the royal addendum, including Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim.
“One cannot conceal it (royal addendum). This is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s order,” Shafee said after attending an in-chamber hearing of Najib’s judicial review leave application to seek enforcement of the alleged royal addendum that allowed the house arrest instead of serving his jail sentence in Kajang Prison.
Shafee (above) added that the High Court set June 5 for a decision on whether to grant leave to Najib to proceed with the judicial review.
If the leave is granted, the court will later set a separate date to hear oral submissions on the merits of the legal action.
On April 4, the lawyer told the media that a “critical witness” was set to file an affidavit to support Najib’s judicial review seeking to serve house arrest for the remainder of his six-year jail sentence over the RM42 million SRC International corruption case.
However, Shafee did not reveal who the critical witness was.
Najib is seeking leave to commence the judicial review for the implementation of an alleged supplementary order by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, linked to the partial pardon that halved his jail sentence to six years and discounted his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million.
On April 1, Najib filed the judicial review leave application while serving jail time at the Kajang Prison over the SRC International corruption case.
House arrest provision
According to his affidavit supporting his judicial review, the former Pekan MP claimed that the Agong’s main royal order allowing the partial pardon was accompanied by a supplementary royal order containing the house arrest provision.
He is seeking a court order to compel the home minister, the attorney-general, the Pardons Board, the federal government, and a few other respondents to confirm this alleged addendum in the partial pardon.
Ex-PM Najib Abdul Razak
According to a copy of the judicial review bid, Najib claimed that the Agong issued the addendum on Jan 29, the same day as the main partial pardon order.
Najib is seeking a court order to compel the respondents to not only confirm the royal addendum but also to “forthwith remove the applicant from Kajang Prison facility to his known residences in Kuala Lumpur, where the applicant would continue to serve his imprisonment sentence under house arrest”.
He also seeks a mandamus order to compel the respondents to provide the original version of the royal addendum, costs, and any other relief deemed fit by the court.
He claimed in his affidavit that his rights had been adversely affected and infringed upon by the respondents in ignoring his inquiries over the alleged royal addendum.
He also claimed that the respondents’ disregard of his request constituted a direct intrusion of his basic rights under the Federal Constitution and amounted to direct contempt of the king.
The former Umno president further alleged that the respondents were trying to conceal the existence of the alleged royal addendum.
‘Not on the list’
On March 4, Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail assured that Najib was not on the list of prisoners who would be serving time via home arrest.
According to a copy of the judicial review bid, Najib claimed that the Agong issued the addendum on Jan 29, the same day as the main partial pardon order.
Najib is seeking a court order to compel the respondents to not only confirm the royal addendum but also to “forthwith remove the applicant from Kajang Prison facility to his known residences in Kuala Lumpur, where the applicant would continue to serve his imprisonment sentence under house arrest”.
He also seeks a mandamus order to compel the respondents to provide the original version of the royal addendum, costs, and any other relief deemed fit by the court.
He claimed in his affidavit that his rights had been adversely affected and infringed upon by the respondents in ignoring his inquiries over the alleged royal addendum.
He also claimed that the respondents’ disregard of his request constituted a direct intrusion of his basic rights under the Federal Constitution and amounted to direct contempt of the king.
The former Umno president further alleged that the respondents were trying to conceal the existence of the alleged royal addendum.
‘Not on the list’
On March 4, Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail assured that Najib was not on the list of prisoners who would be serving time via home arrest.
Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail
The minister told Malaysiakini that only prisoners serving fewer than four years of jail time, senior citizens, pregnant women, and people with disabilities will be on the home detention list.
“Najib is not included in that list,” he said.
Earlier, Harian Metro reported that Putrajaya’s newly proposed home arrest for prisoners was intended to reduce overcrowding in jails, not to be abused by convicted leaders.
Saifuddin reportedly dismissed the claim that the home detention policy was meant to allow Najib to serve his remaining prison term in the comfort of his home as ill-intentioned.
The minister told Malaysiakini that only prisoners serving fewer than four years of jail time, senior citizens, pregnant women, and people with disabilities will be on the home detention list.
“Najib is not included in that list,” he said.
Earlier, Harian Metro reported that Putrajaya’s newly proposed home arrest for prisoners was intended to reduce overcrowding in jails, not to be abused by convicted leaders.
Saifuddin reportedly dismissed the claim that the home detention policy was meant to allow Najib to serve his remaining prison term in the comfort of his home as ill-intentioned.
Based on Murray Hunter's leak....wakakaka... Zahid Hamidi's affidavit is mere hearsay.
ReplyDeleteAll he said was "somebody showed me a photograph of a purported document which somebody else had forwarded to him".
He person who showed him the phone photograph was not even a direct witness.
He may be Deputy Prime Minister, but he has no direct witness standing which can be used as Court Evidence.
A rookie Magistrate handling his first trial should have thrown out the latest case.