Build a 'tahu malu' society: Disclose all documents on Najib's pardon

 

With heavy hearts, we, the undersigned civil society organisations, call upon all Malaysians to build a society that "tahu malu" (knows shame), where the theft of public funds and betrayal of the public mandate are shunned by every stratum.

Blessed by the teachings of Islam and other faiths and civilisations, Malaysia must return to being a society with a strong sense of integrity and shame - one that deters, rather than defends, corruption and abuse of power. Past contributions are not a licence to steal or to escape punishment.

To that end, we call for the immediate and full disclosure of all documents relating to former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak’s "conditional pardon" on Sept 18, under which he is allowed to serve the remainder of his six-year sentence (after reduction in the previous pardon) on house arrest after paying the reduced fine of RM50 million (after reduction in the previous pardon).

This must include the attorney-general’s written submission and the Pardons Board’s meeting minutes. Good decisions can withstand public scrutiny and need no protection of confidentiality. The Malaysian public deserves to understand the reasoning behind Najib’s pardon.

Our detailed position is as follows:

1. Najib’s crime against the Malaysian people and his adamant refusal to accept his punishment underline a deep malaise among Malaysians: a growing norm that excuses, or even embraces, wrongs against the public interest, to the extent that wrongdoers see themselves as victims of political persecution and know no shame. Such affirmation of immorality is a wake-up call for us to build a law-abiding and moral society that upholds the Rukun Negara - formulated under the second prime minister, the late Abdul Razak Hussein - whose fourth principle, “Kedaulatan undang-undang" (The rule of law), is followed by the fifth, “Kesopanan dan kesusilaan" (Courtesy and Morality).

2. Building a society that "knows shame" requires us to put to rest toxic partisanship, often fuelled by weaponised identity politics, and build cross-party consensus towards fairness and decency. We must humbly recognise and own the failure of our political system in enabling Najib’s impunity as our collective responsibility. We must be firm yet prudent in combating corruption, abuse of power, and mistreatment of the opposition, ensuring that our fight against corruption is not weaponised through identity politics. We must demand the separation of the attorney-general and public prosecutor roles, and for the enabling law to be passed before the 16th general election.

3. Najib’s pardon casts a shadow over public perceptions of the rule of law, not only because he has never fully admitted his guilt in the SRC (corruption) case but has instead repeatedly portrayed himself as a victim of political prosecution, but also because he has an outstanding case in 1MDB Tanore, for which he was convicted and sentenced to 15 years in jail and fined RM11.38 billion, with his appeal still underway. On top of that, he faces two more cases, SRC2 (money laundering) and IPIC, in which he was given discharge not amounting to acquittal (DNAA) orders and may be recharged. The amounts involved in all four cases total RM8.989 billion - equivalent to roughly 250,000 years of a RM3,000 monthly salary. Najib’s home detention raises a fundamental question: if his conviction in the 1MDB Tanore case is upheld by the Federal Court, would he realistically be sent back to jail? Or is he expected to receive another pardon to remain out of prison, risking making a mockery of the judicial process? Najib’s unsettled cases make his pardon distinctively different from that of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim, who had no outstanding case at the time of his pardon in 2018.

4. In a parliamentary democracy, laws are made by Parliament and, with powers derived from the Constitution and laws, by the executive. There is currently no law providing for home detention or arrest by way of pardon. Article 42(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution empower the Yang di-Pertuan Agong (for the Federal Territories) and the ruler or governor (for the states) to “grant pardons, reprieves, and respites” and to exercise “any power conferred by federal or state law to remit, suspend, or commute sentences”. Section 43 of the Prisons Act 1995 only allows for the release of a prisoner “on licence”, subject to “any regulation made by the minister”. Home Minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail spoke about a proposed law on the matter in November 2024. This raises two pertinent questions that the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) must answer: Can Najib’s imprisonment in the SRC case be commuted to home detention within the confines of Article 42(1) and (2) of the Federal Constitution? If so, has the Pardons Board effectively assumed Parliament’s role in creating a law for “home detention” through its decision?

5. Justice must not only be done but also be seen to be done. Failure to convince the public that laws are applied equally, regardless of status, power, or political or demographic category, destroys faith in the rule of law, breeds cynicism, and endangers democracy. “Dua darjat” - double standards in the enforcement of laws - can destroy Malaysia by granting impunity to privileged criminals and demoralising law-abiding citizens. Hence, important public decisions must be made transparent so citizens can understand the reasons behind them. Good decisions can withstand public scrutiny and need no protection of confidentiality. As Najib’s pardon carries far-reaching implications for both the rule of law concerning his unsettled cases and Parliament’s role in law-making, all documents involved, including the attorney-general’s written submission and the Pardons Board’s meeting minutes, should be immediately and fully disclosed. Malaysians still remember the troubling legal challenge over Najib’s previous pardon, precisely because the documents were not fully disclosed.  - Mkini

Endorsed by:

1. Project Stability and Accountability for Malaysia (Projek Sama)

2. Angkatan Belia Islam Malaysia (Abim)

3. Engage (Citizens In Action)

4. Gabungan Bertindak Malaysia

5. Gabungan Pilihanraya Bersih dan Adil (Bersih)

6. Iman Research

7. Institute for Democracy and Economic Affairs (Ideas)

8. Lawyer Kamek

9. Liga Rakyat Demokratik

10. Muslim Professional Forum (MPF)

11. Persatuan Pemangkin Daya Masyarakat (PPDM/Rose)

12. Pertubuhan Ikram

13. Rasuah Busters

14. Suara Mahasiswa UMS

---

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