AGC right to seek clarification on Najib’s house arrest order, say lawyers

The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) was right to question the wording of the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s discharge order involving former prime minister Najib Razak, say several lawyers and a legal expert.

Lawyer Razlan Hadri Zulkifli said there had been considerable confusion and differing interpretations among the public over the use of the word “discharge” in the court order.

He said Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar was not challenging the Federal Territories Pardons Board’s decision but merely seeking clarification on the proper interpretation of the order.

“We must let the AG get the necessary clarification. If everything turns out as it should, Najib will serve the remainder of his SRC sentence at his Langgak Duta residence,” he told FMT.

“I don’t think it’s an insurmountable problem. I think the AG has acted in the best tradition of his office.

“I think there’s nothing wrong with the AG raising the issue. In fact, it is commendable. We should be thankful that we have a careful AG.”

He urged Najib’s supporters to be patient, saying the matter was unprecedented.

Another lawyer, A Srimurugan, said the word “discharge” in the court order was ambiguous, with the absence of a specific provision under the Criminal Procedure Code (CPC) further complicating the matter.

“Why can’t we just decipher the word ‘discharge’? It’s because there’s no provision in the CPC to address this. When the king orders someone to serve a sentence under house arrest, does that mean the person is discharged?

“This is why the AG is now pointing out that there is a problem. What the AG is doing is correct.

“He is saying that because of the ambiguity, the AGC has to go back to the court, either by way of revision or by requesting clarification on what the order means,” he said.

Srimurugan stressed that the issue did not originate from the palace or the AG, but from the manner in which Najib’s counsel obtained the order from the High Court’s criminal registry.

“Najib’s situation is unprecedented. Najib’s lawyer ought to have applied for a different kind of order, but he did not,” he said.

Meanwhile, National Council of Professors’ governance and law cluster head Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmood said the AG did not want the word “discharge” to be interpreted as meaning that Najib had been fully released from his SRC conviction.

He said clarification was necessary to prevent further public misunderstanding, particularly over the fact that Najib was still required to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest until August 2028.

“There is a debate in the public sphere suggesting Najib has been freed from his SRC conviction.

“The AG did not want this debate to be exploited for political purposes. So he wants the wording clarified,” he said.

Nik Ahmad Kamal also said the AG was right to raise the issue in keeping with his role as the government’s legal adviser.

Last Friday, Umno paid the RM50 million fine imposed on Najib as part of the conditions allowing him to serve the remainder of his SRC prison sentence under house arrest.

The AGC then called for Najib’s house arrest to be deferred until a review of “complex legal questions” over the discharge order issued by the High Court in Kuala Lumpur.

It highlighted the Kuala Lumpur High Court’s Order of Discharge to the prisons department, which states: “And whereas the said fine amounting to RM50 million has now been paid into this court: This is to authorise you to discharge the said Najib Razak […] forthwith.”

The same court order also states that Najib is to serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest until Aug 23, 2028.

“The dispute arose on the scope and effect of the discharge order – whether it focused solely on the payment of the fine and allowed him (Najib) to serve the remaining SRC International sentence on house arrest, or if the discharge order meant that his (six-year) sentence had been completed,” the AGC said.

The AGC said the legal implications of the court order should be referred to the court immediately to obtain a clear determination and directions.

Subscribe to our newsletter and get news delivered to your mailbox.