Latest news with #AddendumOrder
The Star
a day ago
- Politics
- The Star
A-G not contesting royal addendum, only procedure
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.
The Star
6 days ago
- Politics
- The Star
Federal Court defers decision in AGC's appeal linked to Najib's house arrest bid
PUTRAJAYA: The existence of a royal addendum order that Datuk Seri Najib Razak claimed 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. 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 Muhammad Shafee, 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.
Malaysian Reserve
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Malaysian Reserve
Allegation against Ahmad Terrirudin baseless, says AGC
by FARAH SOLHI THE allegation that former Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh misled the Kuala Lumpur High Court during the leave stage of Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak's judicial review in his house arrest case is completely baseless, said the Attorney General's Chambers (AGC). In a statement today, AGC said the allegation towards Ahmad Terrirudin, raised in Najib's recently filed committal application in High Court, were among the issues currently being scrutinised in Najib's appeal at Apex Court, which will be heard on July 1 and 2. It added that an order of stay of proceedings (postponement) has been issued by the High Court, and that any attempts to commence or continue the contempt proceedings while the order is still in force is a direct violation of the court order and undermines the orderly administration of justice. 'Ahmad Terrirudin has performed his duties in accordance with the constitutional functions of the office. Initiating committal proceedings while the appeal is still pending is inappropriate, premature and prejudicial. 'The ACG calls on all parties to allow the Federal Court to examine and decide on the issues of law and facts, that may be brought forward without pressure, speculation or outside action that could interfere with the course of justice. 'Justice must be served within the framework of the rule of law, not through public statements or side-track litigation,' the statement read. The AGC added that it will not hesitate to apply for the application to be dismissed as an abuse of court process. The AGC further said that the High Court, on April 28, has granted a stay of all proceedings until the appeal is decided by the Federal Court. On May 22, it added, the same court has confirmed in writing that the stay covers all existing and future proceedings related to this case, including contempt of court proceedings. Earlier today, Najib's counsels Messrs Shafee & Co said that they have filed a committal application against Ahmad Terrirudin on May 21, at the High Court where they cited grounds of contempt of court as the basis of the application. The law firm stated that Ahmad Terrirudin, being the AG at the material time, had knowingly, consciously and deliberately instructed or caused arguments that were untrue to be presented to the High Court, during Naijb's leave application for judicial review in regards to the Addendum Order. 'Despite having such knowledge, our client asserts that the former AG, while in office, instructed his officers to mislead the High Court during the hearing of the leave application for judicial review by portraying our client's claim regarding the existence of the Addendum Order as a fishing expedition — speculative and based on hearsay — despite knowing this to be patently false. 'It is our client's view that as a public officer, the former AG owed the court a paramount duty of candour,' said the law firm's statement. Najib, 71, filed his judicial review application on April 1 last year, seeking a mandamus order from the court to compel the government and six other respondents to confirm the existence of the royal addendum. However, the Kuala Lumpur (KL) High Court dismissed his application on July 3 of the same year, ruling that the affidavits submitted constituted hearsay evidence. On Jan 6 this year, the Court of Appeal returned Najib's application regarding the royal addendum to the High Court for a hearing. On April 28, the Federal Court allowed the current AG's appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision, and the Apex Court is scheduled to hear the case in July. Najib is currently serving his jail term in Kajang Prison, Selangor, after the Federal Court maintained KL High Court's decision which found him guilty of corruption involving RM42 millions of funds belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd, a former subsidiary of the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB). Initially, he was sentenced to serve 12 years jail term and RM120 million fine on Aug 23, 2022. However, the Pardons Board announced on Feb 2 last year that his sentence was reduced to six years, with the fine lowered from RM120 million to RM50 million.
Malaysian Reserve
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Malaysian Reserve
Najib files contempt of court application against former AG
by FARAH SOLHI FORMER Prime Minister Datuk Seri Mohd Najib Razak has filed a committal application against former Attorney General (AG) Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh (picture). According to court documents seen by The Malaysian Reserve (TMR), the application — filed on May 21, 2025 — sought the Kuala Lumpur High Court's leave (permission) to initiate committal proceedings on the grounds of contempt of court. The law firm issuing the documents said that Ahmad Terrirudin, being the AG at the material time, had knowingly, consciously and deliberately instructed or caused arguments that were untrue to be presented to the High Court, during Naijb's leave application for judicial review in regards to the Addendum Order. 'He (Ahmad Terrirudin) had received the Order from the previous Yang di-Pertuan Agong instructing him, by name, to execute the house imprisonment of the applicant's (Najib) from Jan 29, 2024. 'The respondent endorsing such false submissions to the court is contrary to his paramount duty to the administration of justice. 'It undermines public confidence in the judicial system and constitutes contempt in the face of the court and or an interference with the due administration of justice, especially when the office of the AG has a duty of candour towards the applicant and the public at large,' the document stated. Meanwhile, in a separate statement, the law firm reiterated its claims that Ahmad Terrirudin had direct knowledge of the Order, following a Pahang Royal Council letter that had formally confirmed the authenticity and validity of the Order, that was personally addressed to the former AG during his time in office. 'Despite having such knowledge, our client asserts that the former AG, while in office, instructed his officers to mislead the High Court during the hearing of the leave application for judicial review by portraying our client's claim regarding the existence of the Addendum Order as a fishing expedition — speculative and based on hearsay — despite knowing this to be patently false. 'It is our client's view that as a public officer, the former AG owed the court a paramount duty of candour. 'Malaysian and international jurisprudence, including decisions of our own Federal Court recently, makes plain that the government must place all relevant facts and documents before the court in any judicial review matter. 'A deliberate failure to do so undermines public confidence in the administration of justice, and indeed is an obstruction of justice itself,' the statement said. The firm further said that given Ahmad Terrirudin now serves as a Federal Court judge, it is essential that he be afforded an opportunity to answer these serious allegations, and if appropriate, purge the contempt. Najib, 71, filed his judicial review application on April 1 last year, seeking a mandamus order from the court to compel the government and six other respondents to confirm the existence of the royal addendum. However, the Kuala Lumpur (KL) High Court dismissed his application on July 3 of the same year, ruling that the affidavits submitted constituted hearsay evidence. On Jan 6 this year, the Court of Appeal returned Najib's application regarding the royal addendum to the High Court for a hearing. On April 28, the Federal Court allowed the current AG's appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision, and the Apex Court is scheduled to hear the case in July. Najib is currently serving his jail term in Kajang Prison, Selangor, after the Federal Court maintained KL High Court's decision which found him guilty of corruption involving RM42 millions of funds belonging to SRC International Sdn Bhd, a former subsidiary of the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB). Initially, he was sentenced to serve 12 years jail term and RM120 million fine on Aug 23, 2022. However, the Pardons Board announced on Feb 2 last year that his sentence was reduced to six years, with the fine lowered from RM120 million to RM50 million.
