KUALA LUMPUR (Feb 24): The High Court on Monday has fixed April 28 as the hearing date for the request by the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC), representing the Federal Territory Pardons Board and six others, for a gag and prohibitive order barring the public and anyone — other than court officials — from accessing or discussing imprisoned former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s purported addendum order.
Judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz fixed the date following case management which was attended by Najib’s lawyers Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah and Muhammad Farhan Shafee, and Senior Federal Counsel Nurhafizza Azizan and Ainna Sherina Saipolamin representing the board and others.
“The hearing date is fixed for April 28, at 2.30pm,” Hayatul said, adding that the court also fixed the same date for case management of Najib’s main addendum application.
The court directed Shafee to file an affidavit in reply to Solicitor-General II Datuk Suzana Atan’s affidavit by March 7, while the AGC is given an opportunity to reply to Shafee or Najib’s affidavit on March 21.
Hayatul Akmal also directed parties to file their written submissions by April 11, and reply by April 23.
Govt filed application on Jan 20 to stop public discussion
On Jan 20, the board, along with the Home Minister, Law and Institutional Reform Minister, the AG, the Director-General of the Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister’s Department, the Commissioner General of the Prisons Department, and the federal government, had filed a prohibitory and gag order, barring the public from openly discussing the purported royal addendum that would have allowed Najib to serve the remainder of his six-year prison sentence under house arrest.
If granted, the gag order would be in effect until the end of Najib’s application and any appeal in the case is disposed of.
The government is seeking for the court to bar any comments and suspicious discussions, questioning, challenging, or insulting the prerogative of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and His Majesty’s power under the Federal Constitution to give the pardon.
In challenging the gag and prohibition order, Najib had in an affidavit said the application is premature and should be struck out, as the applicants must show that there is an immediate risk, or threat, or prejudice, to any of the parties in the proceeding. The royal institution is not a party in the proceedings, he added.
“In addition, the attorney general’s [AG] claim that the application is required to ensure the security of the country is unsubstantiated, as it [the AGC] failed to provide any evidence that there is a threat to national security,” the 71-year-old former Pekan member of parliament said.
Suzana in reply said there that is a clear need for a “gag order” on the matter, as there had been town halls and forums which Shafee attended, which may prejudice the on-going judicial review process.
The examples cited in Suzana’s affidavit are:
1. Townhall rakyat mencari kebenaran — Badan kehakiman & keadilan rakyat (1MDB, SRC, IPIC, DNAA, DAA, Hearsay, Addendum, Tahanan politik, Konflik kepentingan, Tahanan rumah, Hak rakyat)
2. Townhall rakyat mencari kebenaran — Pengampunan Diraja: Skop dan halangan
3. Titah adendum disorok? Siapa yang bertanggungjawab
4. Gag order on addendum will worsen public trust towards govt, says Puad
5. Wacana awam — Menolak lupa: Najib Razak, 1MDB & tahanan rumah
6. Let’s talk about what the royal addendum means
7. Royal addendum gag order — Addendum: Despite gag order threat, the people will continue to speak up
8. Gag order on Najib's review application against the constitutional right of freedom of speech
9. Trick Lama: Shafee Abdullah breaks down the royal addendum on Najib Razak's house arrest
10. Spotify playlist: This is royal addendum
“I emphasise that a negative discussion and confusing innuendo and defamatory discussions done openly in the public can jeopardise public trust and incite prejudice against the royal institution,” she said, adding that Najib’s claim that there is no threat or immediate risk due to no legal action is inaccurate.
On Jan 6, the Court of Appeal by a majority decision allowed Najib’s appeal for the merits of his addendum application be heard on its full merits before Hayatul, after High Court judge Datuk Amarjeet Singh had earlier dismissed the former PM’s application.
At the same time, the AG had also filed leave to appeal before the Federal Court over the appellate court’s Jan 6 decision.
Najib was originally sentenced to 12 years’ jail and fined RM210 million when the Federal Court upheld his conviction and sentence for all seven criminal breach of trust, money laundering, and abuse of power charges with regards to the SRC International criminal case.
However, the board allowed the highest ranking politician’s pardon request and reduced his sentence to six years’ jail and a RM50 million fine.
Despite this, Najib alleges that there was an addendum allowing him to serve the remainder of his jail sentence under house arrest.