A-G not contesting royal addendum, only procedure

The Star

a day ago

PUTRAJAYA: The existence of a royal addendum order that Datuk Seri Najib Razak claimed, which would allow him to serve his remaining prison time under house arrest, is not contested by the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC), the Federal Court heard.
Senior Federal Counsel Shamsul Bolhassan told a three-judge panel, chaired by Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Hasnah Moham­med Hashim, that the AGC was disputing the manner in which the document was tendered to the court in Najib's judicial review application at the High Court.
He contended that Najib must comply with the rules and regulations of the court in tendering new evidence.
'We maintain our stand. We rely on our submission and leave it to the court,' he said yesterday.
The apex court was hearing submissions from parties in the AG's appeal to set aside a 2-1 majority ruling by the Court of Appeal on Jan 6 that remitted Najib's case back to the High Court to be heard on its merits.
Other judges on the bench are Federal Court judges Justices Zabariah Mohd Yusof and Hani­pah Farikullah.
Najib's lawyer Tan Sri Muham­mad Shafee Abdullah submitted that the duty of candour in judicial review does not require the respondent (Najib) to obtain the copy of the addendum order as it was the role of the AG to confirm or deny the existence of the addendum at the leave stage.
'The question of whether or not the addendum order was not obtained with reasonable diligence during the proceedings before the High Court is a non-­issue because the respondent's deponents clearly affirmed that they had no capacity to have a copy of the Addendum Order due to its secrecy at the material time.
'The respondent submitted that he had reasonably attempted with reasonable diligence to gain confirmations on the existence of the addendum order,' Muham­mad Shafee said.
According to him, the addendum document was only obtained by the applicant's son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar, after the High Court's decision and it was subject to a condition that it could not be used without the palace's consent.
'This restriction is crucial, even if the document was in hand, the respondent was not legally or ethi­cally free to use it until permission was granted.
'Once permission was granted on Dec 2, 2024, the respondent immediately filed the affidavit in court. This promptness reflects that there was no unnecessary delay once the document became usable.
'In fact, the respondent can be said to exercise beyond its legal duty to produce the same in assisting this court,' he added.
Justice Hasnah then told parties that the court will deliver its decision on a later date.
'We'll let you know of the date and our decision. Thank you for all the submission and all the authorities submitted. Court is adjourned,' she said.
On Jan 6, in a 2-1 majority decision, the Court of Appeal remitted the case on Najib's claim of the existence of an additional document purportedly allowing him to serve the remainder of his six-year prison sentence under house arrest to the High Court to be heard on its merits.
This decision overturned the High Court's earlier ruling, which had dismissed Najib's application for leave to commence a judicial review regarding the alleged addi­tional document.
On April 28, the Federal Court granted leave to the AG to appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision.
Najib is currently serving a six-year jail sentence in connection with the SRC International Sdn Bhd case, following the Federal Court's dismissal of his appeal and review application.
In February last year, the Par­dons Board reduced his initial 12-year jail sentence and fine of RM210mil to six years and RM50mil fine.