Malaysia’s top court rejects Najib’s bid to block AGC’s appeal on house arrest royal addendum order
The Federal Court has set Apr 28 to deliver its decision on the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) application to stop Najib Razak’s bid to seek a judicial review of the purported house arrest addendum order.
Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak gestures as he walks escorted by prison officers during an appeal hearing at the Kuala Lumpur High Court on Apr 17, 2024. (File photo: AFP/Mohd Rasfan)
PUTRAJAYA: Malaysia’s Federal Court on Monday (Mar 24) has dismissed former prime minister Najib Razak’s preliminary objection raised against the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) application seeking leave to appeal against his bid for house arrest.
The three-judge panel chaired by Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Hasnah Mohammed Hahsim unanimously came to the decision after hearing submissions from Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar and Najib’s lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.
Local news outlet Malay Mail reported that Dusuki had made a rare personal appearance at the Federal Court on Monday, alongside senior federal counsels Shamsul Bolhasan and Ahmad Hanir Hambaly.
Najib, who is currently serving a reduced six-year prison sentence for corruption related to the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB) scandal, was also present at Monday’s court hearing.
The hearing chaired by Hasnah alongside Federal Court judges Zabairah Mohd Yusof and Hanipah Farikullah relates to the AGC’s bid to seek leave to appeal a previous Court of Appeal’s ruling on Jan 6.
The top court has also set Apr 28 to deliver its decision on the AGC’s leave application to stop Najib’s bid to seek a judicial review of a purported royal addendum order of his house arrest.
“We will not be making a decision on Monday,” Hasnah was quoted as saying by The Star.
Najib was found guilty in 2020 of criminal breach of trust and abuse of power for illegally receiving funds misappropriated from a unit of state investor 1MDB.
He was sentenced to 12 years in jail and fined RM210 million (US$47.4 million) before Malaysia’s former king - Sultan Abdullah Ri'ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah - reduced Najib’s jail time and fine to RM50 million as one of his last official tasks before stepping down on Jan 30 last year.
Slightly over two months later, Najib applied for leave to seek judicial review of his sentence, claiming that the Jan 29, 2024 meeting of the Pardons Board contained an addendum order issued by Sultan Abdullah for him to serve the remainder of his reduced sentence under house arrest.
Najib’s application was rejected by the High Court in July, but on Jan 6, in a 2-1 majority decision, the Court of Appeal revoked the decision and said the High Court has to hear the case.
That then led to the AGC’s appeal.
Dusuki, in his first court appearance as attorney-general on Monday, submitted seven questions of law that he said met the threshold for leave under Section 96 (a) and (b) Courts of Judicature Act.
The questions included whether he must confirm and provide copies of disputed documents and whether the former prime minister is allowed to submit new evidence affecting the Pardons Board decision, The Star reported.
Under Section 96 of the Courts of Judicature Act in Malaysia, leave for appeal is only granted if novel constitutional or legal questions of public importance are raised for the first time, Malay Mail reported.
Dusuki also added that the subject of Najib’s judicial review was “non-justiciable”.
“This is because the respondent, in effect, attempts to traverse beyond or behind the express words of the main order, a subject that is non-justiciable to review by this honourable court,” he was quoted as saying by The Star.
“The subject matter herein hinges on the high prerogative exercisable by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. As such, the court has no jurisdiction to confirm or vary the decision made by the (former) king in the pardon process,” the attorney-general added, referring to the Pahang ruler.
Shafee - who is Najib’s lead counsel - clarified that his team was not challenging the Pardons Board decision.
“We are in fact upholding the King’s power in decreeing it (the addendum order). Many people think the Pardons Board made the decision (for house arrest) … This is nothing further than the truth,” Shafee said, as quoted by The Star.
Najib’s lawyer also argued that the addendum order was “issued by a written decree” and the attorney-general should provide the evidence.
In his reply, Dusuki said that the AGC was not bound to produce the disputed evidence.
If the Federal Court grants the AGC’s application, the panel will then hear its arguments to overturn the Court of Appeal’s ruling.
However, if it rejects the AGC’s request, Najib’s judicial hearing before High Court Judge Hayatul Akmal Abdul Aziz will proceed as scheduled.
Last month, Sultan Abdullah called on all parties to “stop further discussions” regarding the royal order he had allegedly issued, stressing that the matter is before the courts and called on all parties to respect the “legal process”.
And in January, the AGC had also sought a gag order to ban public discussion of Najib’s judicial review claim that the royal addendum decree existed.
Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim had previously also said that the royal order was sent to the attorney-general and not to him nor any other member of the Pardons Board.
