Disastrous to pardon Najib

If the Pardons Board decides later this month that former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak is to be pardoned for the offences he was sentenced to jail for 12 years, it will be a disaster for Malaysia, setting the country back decades and making a mockery of the rule of law.

And if Pakatan Harapan, PKR and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim think that this will garner them support from Malays and bring in the Malay votes to ensure another term at the top office, they are going to be very sadly mistaken. The bare, bald figures don’t show that.

Let’s take each in turn. First, Najib has been unanimously found guilty of seven charges - one of abuse of power, three of criminal breach of trust and three of money laundering - involving RM42 million. He was jailed for 12 years and fined RM210 million.

Now here’s the rub. He was found guilty by a High Court judge and then unanimously by a three-member Court of Appeal and then by a five-member Federal Court, also unanimously.

He went to jail on Aug 23, 2022. Less than one and half years later of a 12-year sentence, he expects an unprecedented pardon.

Najib and his lawyers have been pushing for a pardon, saying that he did not receive a fair trial. However, that does not cut it, for nine senior judges found without any disagreement that the evidence was strong, with the chief justice even describing it as overwhelming.

On top of that, as he was jailed, he was facing four other charges, all involving 1MDB. He won an audit tampering case over 1MDB but is still facing three other serious charges.

There are three other pending high-profile court cases against Najib, which include 25 charges involving RM2.3 billion, six criminal breach of trust cases involving RM6.6 billion and money laundering involving RM27 million.

Tarnishing Malaysia’s reputation

There is no reason whatsoever why a convicted felon facing other more serious criminal charges and responsible for billions of ringgit in losses at self-styled national strategic development company 1MDB should receive a pardon.

If he does, the definite inference is that it is a political deal of the worst kind - letting a felon go free in exchange for perceived increased political support.

That is a punishing indictment against Malaysia which will have far-reaching consequences for the rakyat, for the economy, for governance and the lack of confidence that Malaysians and foreigners will have in the country.

This coalition government must stop in its tracks, especially in regard to Umno Baru’s selfish and desperate attempts to pardon Najib with the excuse that it will (probably) gain Malay support.

That will only push this country down a slippery path with all footholds removed through the pardon process.

Selfish because many in Umno’s top leadership were complicit and connived with Najib during the IMDB scandal, receiving money into their accounts from 1MDB funds.

They are turning desperate because they know that Umno in its current form cannot get Malay support.

Harapan and the PM will do well to remember that the rakyat rejected Umno in 2018 because of 1MDB and then again in 2022 because of continuing corruption. Umno has a paltry 26 seats now.

The perceived support for Najib is illusionary - not many will support the pardoning of a convict who still faces serious charges as the results of the last elections show.

Non-Malays, a bastion of support for Harapan will become disillusioned and abstain, or even vote for the opposition.

We could well see PAS and its allies gaining ground and perhaps even power at the next polls as a result of a public backlash against the coalition government.

The obvious connection

Despite what Najib’s lawyers commented about the king having absolute power over whether to pardon or not, that is untrue if you refer to the Federal Constitution, which clearly shows the king is a constitutional monarch.

Article 40(1) reads:

“In the exercise of his functions under this Constitution or federal law, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall act following the advice of the cabinet or a minister acting under the general authority of the cabinet, except as otherwise provided by this Constitution; but shall be entitled, at his request, to any information concerning the government of the Federation which is available to the cabinet.”

That is a clear indication that unless otherwise stated, the king acts under advice. Article 42(1) grants the power to pardon the king for offences deemed to be committed in the Federal Territories under advice from the Pardons Board.

Article 42(5) and (11) of the Federal Constitution in effect specify the composition of the Pardons Board to be the attorney general, the federal territories minister and three other members appointed by the king. Again, Article 40(1) indicates this appointment is under advice.

In this instance, the appointment of a new federal territories minister in the recent cabinet reshuffle has been linked to Anwar ensuring that he is not part of the Pardons Board and hence, cannot be held responsible for any decision.

If the board rules in favour of Najib, no one can stop that connection and the accompanying conjecture from being made.

Finally, there is Article 42(9): “Before tendering their advice on any matter, a Pardons Board shall consider any written opinion which the attorney-general may have delivered thereon.”

I can’t see the attorney-general agreeing that Najib had faced an unfair trial and going against the decisions of nine eminent judges.

In fact, as the AG, he should support judicial independence and integrity as well as the entire court process, thus upholding the rule of law and negating any attempt to use the pardon process to avoid lawful sentences.

Najib’s pardon - if it comes - is an unmitigated disaster for Malaysia. But thankfully, it looks like it won’t. And that’s as it should be. - Mkini

---

P GUNASEGARAM believes in the long-standing oft-quoted dictum by Lord Hewart in 1924, then chief judge of England: “Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done.”

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.