When royal pardon meets court decision, shouldn’t public interest be the overarching consideration? — Hafiz Hassan

OCTOBER 16 — The High Court on Wednesday (October 14) dismissed former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s application to stay the execution of his 15-year prison sentence and RM11.38 billion fine in the 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) corruption case.

Justice Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin ruled that Najib failed to establish the special circumstances required to justify a stay pending his ongoing appeals.

The learned judge said that after weighing the arguments from both the prosecution and defence, the gravity of the offences was a more important public interest consideration.

Former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak at the Kuala Lumpur Court Complex Oct 14, 2026. — Picture by Firdaus Latif

Public interest is the “overarching” consideration.

When asked where the former prime minister was currently serving his sentence, Najib’s lead counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah answered: “He is still in Kajang prison because we have not raised the RM50 million [fine]. Once it is paid, he will be transferred to his house.”

But Najib is already in prison not only because he is serving his sentence in the 1MDB corruption case until his appeal against conviction and sentence is heard, but he is currently serving his sentence stemming from a separate conviction in the SRC International trial. 

Now that the Federal Territories Pardons Board has announced that Najib can serve the remainder of his reduced SRC sentence under house arrest until August 23, 2028, subject to conditions including payment of a RM50 million fine, will he be allowed to serve the house arrest when his sentence in the 1MDB case has not been stayed?

When royal pardon meets court decision, which takes precedence?

Shouldn’t public interest be the overarching consideration?

* This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.