KUALA LUMPUR (April 4): Lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah on Thursday sought further time for Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s application for a judicial review of his pardon bid, in which the former prime minister claims included being placed under “house arrest” instead of at Kajang Prison.
Shafee said the defence team had to file an affidavit of what he calls “a critical witness” in the whole affair, as the person is in Makkah for the last 10 days in the month of Ramadan, and would only be back after Hari Raya Aidilfitri next week.
Shafee said that although they had filed a certificate of urgency for the former prime minister’s judicial review, they need to have the witness’ supporting affidavit.
Following this, judge Datuk Amarjeet Singh fixed April 17 for the case of leave (permission) to be heard.
The court directed Shafee to file the affidavit by Aug 15.
Shafee is also to serve a copy of it to the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), which in this case is represented by senior federal counsel Ahmad Hanir Hambaly @ Arwi, who was present in the ex-parte (single-party) proceedings.
Ahmad Hanir, appearing for the AG, the government, and other respondents, said the AGC had also filed written submissions late on Wednesday, after learning of the application.
Although it was not disclosed, it is understood that the government would object to the leave application.
Shafee, when approached by reporters, declined to reveal the identity of the alleged critical witness.
Ismail Sabri made Parliament revelation
During a recent Parliament debate session, former prime minister Datuk Seri Ismail Sabri Yaakob, who is also the Bera Member of Parliament, in addressing the royal address wanted the government to clarify the outcome of the Federal Territory Pardons Board’s decision that purportedly allowed Najib to complete his prison sentence under home detention.
Ismail said he learnt that there was an "attachment" submitted to the Pardons Board that sought to relocate Najib from Kajang Prison to home detention, in addition to the petition for a royal pardon that was submitted previously.
In the judicial review application filed on Monday, Najib claimed that the 16th Yang di Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah, had purportedly allowed him to serve his six years’ jail term under house arrest, following a pardon granted on Jan 29.
That sentence was a reduction from the earlier sentence of 12 years’ jail, with the fine of RM210 million reduced to RM50 million, after Najib was found guilty of abuse of power, criminal breach of trust, and money laundering of SRC International Sdn Bhd funds.
In his judicial review application to be placed under house arrest, the former Pekan Member of Parliament and former Umno president claimed that there was an addendum to the Pardons Board’s document, in which the then Agong had allegedly decreed that he serve the jail sentence under house arrest.
Najib wants the production of the pardon order and the addendum order, and wants to compel the government to place him under house arrest at his residence here to serve the remainder of the sentence.
Najib is currently serving his jail sentence at Kajang Prison. He is also the sole accused in the 1Malaysia Development Bhd-Tanore (1MDB-Tanore) trial, and has another two trials pending, namely the second SRC case and the 1MDB-International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC) case.
Besides the AG and the government, the others named include the Prisons Department commissioner general, the home minister, the director general of the law division of the Prime Minister’s Department, the Federal Territory Pardons Board, the minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (law and institutional reform), and the director general of legal affairs of the Prime Minister’s Department.
Najib claims in his affidavit in support of a judicial review that inaction of the decree is considered as irrational, unreasonable, illegal, and arbitrary, and offends the Federal Constitution, in particular Article 42 of the Yang di Pertuan Agong’s prerogative to grant a pardon.
“This is unfettered discretion, unchallengeable in any court of law by any process, as this is the prerogative of the 16th Yang di Pertuan Agong,” the former prime minister said, adding that the King’s orders were not merely administrative decrees, but reflections of the legal and moral authority vested in the monarchy.
Malaysian Bar wants to hold a watching brief
The Malaysian Bar, which was represented by Abhilash Subramaniam, also applied to hold a watching brief in the proceedings.
As this is an ex-parte application, the judge asked the purpose for the Bar wanting to hold a watching brief, to which Abhilash replied that as the Bar is the guardian of justice, the application should be allowed.
“The Bar has not filed a formal application, as we only got to know of the matter following media reports,” Abhilash said.
“Furthermore, a motion was passed during the Bar's recent annual general meeting to file a judicial review to challenge the decision of the Pardons Board. We have yet to file the application, but we are still within time,” Abhilash added.
Judge Amarjeet said he would not allow the Bar to hold a watching brief in the leave-application stage, but would allow it should leave be granted.