When Anwar Ibrahim got his Royal Pardon, he had almost completed his sentence for the crime he committed. Hence, when should Najib really deserve to be pardoned?
Ex-Premier Najib Razak was found guilty for all 7 offences, and was sentenced to 72 years in prison and a fine of RM210 million (in default five years' imprisonment), should there not have been an application for compensation for the victims of his crimes? The Court was ‘merciful’ and ordered his sentences for the different offences to run at the same time – and thus he has to spend only 12 years, being the highest sentence being 12 years for the abuse of power charge.
Anwar Ibrahim's pardon comes about 3 weeks before he would have finished serving the 5 year sodomy sentence. Even, if there was NO Pardon, Anwar would have been released from prison on 8th June
May 16, 2018 - Anwar is granted full royal pardon and released from detention ahead of the end of his sentence on June 8.
How was a former UMNO-BN politician dealt with?
In 1983, Datuk Mokhtar Hashim, then Culture, Youth and Sports Minister received the death penalty for the murder of Datuk Taha Talib, the state assemblyman for Tampin, In 1984 he received a ‘royal pardon’ when his death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment, and thereafter in 1991 another ‘royal pardon’ set him free from prison. - He spent about 8 years in prison.
Now, for a politician or future politician, the Disqualification last for an additional FIVE(5) years after he has served his/her sentence and released from jail, or paid his fine...
Article 48(3) The disqualification of a person under paragraph (d) or paragraph (e) of Clause (1) may be removed by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and shall, if not so removed, cease at the end of the period of five years beginning with the date on which the return mentioned in the said paragraph (d) was required to be lodged, or, as the case may be, the date on which the person convicted as mentioned in the said paragraph (e) was released from custody or the date on which the fine mentioned in the said paragraph (e) was imposed on such person; and a person shall not be disqualified under paragraph (f) of Clause (1) by reason only of anything done by him before he became a citizen.
This is an UNJUST provision in law - why should he be further disqualified from contesting and being an MP, after he has already served the sentence imposed by court. After serving one's sentence, one should be FREE to contest for elections, and become a MP or ADUN. If not, is this not DISCRIMINATION against a certain class - politicians? THIS PROVISION MUST BE REPEALED.
At, present to avoid this further 5 year disqualification, one needs the King's pardon.
Remember, that Anwar was released on September 2004, after the Federal Court acquitted him of sodomy. Yes, acquitted for SODOMY, but on that date he had already served the sentence for his 'Corruption' charge - so, his disqualification 5-year period still ran from the date he completed his sentence for the corruption charge.
Sept 2, 2004 - Anwar freed after Federal Court acquits Anwar of sodomy.
March 8, 2008 - Faced with a five-year ban from politics due to his past conviction, Anwar acts behind the scenes to negotiate direct fights between opposition parties against BN in the 12th general election. BN loses two-thirds majority in the Dewan Rakyat in its worst performance in history.
April 2, 2008 - Pakatan Rakyat comprising PKR, DAP and PAS formed.
April 14, 2008 - Anwar's five-year ban on politics expires. 20,000 people gather at the "Black 14" rally to welcome his return to politics.... Malaysiakini, 20/9/2018
....ex- Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim's record - for in April 1999, he was also found guilty of 4 corruption charges, and was sentenced to 6 years imprisonment for each of these charges. Again, there the Judge ordered that all sentences to run concurrently, meaning he just had to spend 6 years in jail.
Anwar was sentenced to six years on each of the four charges. The sentences were to run concurrently, according to one of Anwar's defense attorneys, Pawancheek Merican.
Anwar appealed - but he failed to overturn his conviction and sentence for these corruption charges.
Attention of many were focused on the sodomy charge. On Aug. 8, 2000 - Anwar is found guilty and is sentenced to nine years prison for sodomy, to be served consecutive to his six year term for corruption.This meant that the 9 year term will only begin after the six years imprisonment for corruption ends.
On July 10, 2002, Anwar loses final appeal at the Federal Court on his corruption conviction.
However, on September 2004, the three-person Federal Court bench reached a 2-1 majority decision in the Sodomy case when they allowed the former deputy prime minister’s appeal and overturned the conviction and nine-year jail term yesterday regard the sodomy charge.
By this time, he had already served his imprisonment for corruption, and as such he was freed when the Federal Court quashed his sodomy conviction...'Ex-PM Najib sentence of 72 years imprisonment, beats ex-DPM Anwar's 1999 corruption conviction and sentence of 24 years?
Now, the talk in town is about the PARDON of Najib - well, personally, I am of the opinion that pardon should not be granted until one has served maybe 75% or more of their sentence...
Pardon should maybe not be granted to one who has not yet REPENTED ...Should it not follow the principles set by Federal Law that allows for the 'remission of sentences for good conduct or special services'...Would even such 'principles' apply in the case of Najib as the crimes are related to offenses committed when he was a Minister??? Good conduct - well, that should be determined on his conduct in prison serving his sentence.
The power of PARDON is with the King and the Rulers of States > generally where the offenses were committed.
The Pardon Powers of the King are exercisable on the advice of the relevant Pardons Board or is it so, as this is not clear. - '...Yang di-Pertuan Agong acting on the advice of the Pardons Board...'
Anyway, then the composition of the Pardons Board becomes an issue > we know that MPs and Senators cannot be part of the Pardons Board, although the Prime Minister and the Menteri Besar will accompany the ruler during proceedings of the Pardon Board. Can they speak, or do they just accompany?
(5) The Pardons Board constituted for each State shall consist of the Attorney General of the Federation, the Chief Minister of the State and not more than three other members, who shall be appointed by the Ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri;...
Who appoints the 3 members of the Pardon Board? Is it the King alone, OR the King acting on the advice of the Prime Minister? {Note, it is not clear whether the King has absolute discretion to appoint Pardon Board members - see Article 40(2). Is it '...any other case mentioned in this Constitution....'?
40 (2) The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may act in his discretion in the performance of the following functions, that is to say:
(a) the appointment of a Prime Minister;
(b) the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of Parliament;
(c) the requisition of a meeting of the Conference of Rulers concerned solely with the privileges, position, honours and dignities of Their Royal Highnesses, and any action at such a meeting,
and in any other case mentioned in this Constitution.
As it stands now, the King's Pardons Board has 5 members - the Prime Minister, the Attorney General and 3 other members? What is the quorum? How independent is the Pardons Board from the current Prime Minister?
In short, there really is a need for REFORM of the composition of the Pardons Board and the pardon procedure...It should certainly be independent from the current Prime Minister and government...and the selection of the OTHER 3 Pardon Board members need to be also independent. Should the KING be given absolute discretion in the appointment of Pardon Board members?
Rights of the victims to address the Pardon Boards - considering they suffered because of the action/omission of the perpetrator who may or may not be pardoned by the King or any ruler?
Should the Prime Minister, Chief Ministers and the Attorney General be not given a right to VOTE?
Many are worried about PM Anwar Ibrahim and the Pakatan Harapan? How they are 'changing' is a concern. Do they still depend on the UMNO-BN to remain PM and government - as they now claim they have the support from Sabah/Sarawak MPs, which means that even if BN stops supporting Anwar, they will still be in power.
Compromising values and principles to simply retain government power is not a good justification at all...Will PH come back in GE16, and blame their failure to secure majority and their need to be with BN...as an excuse for people to still support them?
Well, personally, if PH elects to form an 'electoral pact' with BN in the upcoming State elections, I would say all is lost for PH. PH should contest and run alone in ALL seats against BN, PN and others in the upcoming State elections... The people will decide.
In any event, there must be REFORM in the Pardon process - the composition of the Pardon Board members, the rights and procedures, and the decision making at the end of the day. The government of the day(be it Prime Minister or Chief Minister) must not be in the Pardon Board...The Attorney General(who is also the Public Prosecutor now) certainly should not have voting rights in the Pardon Board. The VICTIMS must also be a right to be heard in Pardon Board proceedings.
In Najib's case, the victim are Malaysians, the government and related companies maybe. Rightfully, one of the person speaking for Malaysians maybe Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim...
What will happen? What will happen?
The Najib pardon quandary
APRIL 13 — What would the rakyat do if he is released prematurely?
A substantial number of Malaysians spent a better part of 10 years to raise awareness and champion the successful prosecution of former prime minister Najib Razak. They won after great sacrifices.
He has been incarcerated for seven months now.
An effort is underway to give him a pardon.
The cost-benefit analysis to a pardon decision holds a whole government hostage as it increasingly appears a damned if you do, damned if you don’t situation.
Yet, the hullabaloo over Najib sheds light on our fragile present.
Pardon the paradoxical permutations
A straight answer is elusive. It is a triangle of the executive, the Pardons Board and the Agong.
Our Constitution’s Article 42 is solely about pardons and covers extensively the roles and processes with persistent caveats that those decisions are subject to advisories and considerations by committee.
So, the persistent suggestion the decision rests squarely on the monarch rather than on political interests is both naïve and misleads.
Constitutions by their very nature allow for healthy ambiguities in which the best minds of each passing generation sit and argue.
Obviously, those debates fascinate. But to oversimplify them to absolutes and rely on the complexities to reduce the ownership of the decision from any one reeks of political cover.
Here’s the uncomfortable truth.
Without political push, pardons for politicians are not accelerated or even processed.
Anwar Ibrahim was arrested in 1998 and never saw a day out of prison until September 2004. The political realities then did not permit the possibility of a pardon.
Anwar was convicted again in 2014 and served his sentence until 2018. The political realities of 2014 to 2018 did not permit the possibility of a pardon.
In May, 2018, a coalition with his party PKR’s 50 seats formed government. Anwar had still a month to complete his sentence.
The political realities of 2018 post-government change processed his pardon inside a week. The political realities then permitted a pardon.
Najib was convicted in August 2022. The Perikatan Nasional government then under Ismail Sabri Yaakob continued to govern until November 2022. With Bersatu part of his government, the political realities did not permit the possibility of a pardon.
Anwar replaced Ismail Sabri as prime minister late last year with Umno’s assistance. The political realities now permit the possibility of a pardon.
The Najib pardon scenario relies heavily on political support. Anyone saying otherwise is pulling the wool over the nation’s collective eyes.
It’s obvious many in the corridor of power desire this, otherwise it won’t merit the discussion.
All quiet on the Pakatan front
Through 2015 to 2018, Pakatan Harapan politicians could not shut up about 1MDB.
There were camel jokes, whale jokes, fat Penang boy who does not want to return to the island cause he is busy partying with the rich and famous jokes and of course, Arab passion to donate jokes.
They filled up whole rally speeches. It is the rakyat’s money and 1MDB is about the rakyat they shouted, and the speakers intended to be elected so they can go after those behind the mother of all scandals.
And here they are, the various Pakatan MPs — Gobind Singh, Nga Kor Ming and Rafizi Ramli for instance — gone silent on the Najib pardon efforts. Should they not speak up and insist that he should serve his sentence to underline the gravity of the issue?
The self-imposed gag among Pakatan MPs and politicians is palpable and reflects the ugly side of the wholehearted all-in attitude to work at all levels with Umno and to realise the unity government’s secretariat.
It means they let go of previous struggles for current gains.
The only Pakatan MP, ironically from Anwar’s PKR, Batu Pahat’s Hassan Abdul Karim has urged a rethink on the Najib pardon effort.
How did he end up the unitary voice of Opposition in a coalition built to oppose injustice?
A whale of a scandal
It went on for years. It dragged in Martin Scorsese, Leonardo Di Caprio and the Golden Globes.
It went on yachts, parties with the glamorous like Paris Hilton and the who’s who of Hollywood.
It went to the US Courts via the US Justice Department initiating investigations.
It went into investigations in at least six countries, including the United States, Singapore, Australia and Switzerland.
It went into the billions and left the Malaysian taxpayers with a bill to settle over the decades to come.
It was 1MDB. The SRC corruption is part of the whole tangled web of 1MDB’s deceit, lies and theft.
To then reduce this conviction to a small error of judgement, one minor indiscretion insults the collective intelligence of all Malaysians. The whole fiasco was diligently executed with layers of malice and absolute contempt for those who suffer.
Hassan Minhaj’s hit show Patriot Act on Netflix has a whole episode on it for a global audience, that’s how big it was.
In case it has passed notice, Najib was 1MDB’s chairman. As a reminder, just watch the clip again.
The prosecution was a mountain to scale as it is with modern financial cases when it is difficult to link acts with people when paper trails are longer than giant rivers.
Somehow, they managed to get the prized conviction.
He has been in prison for less than a year and they want to consider a pardon.
Why bother fighting for justice when the mischievous are forgiven in record time?
Clemency is for the contrite
A teacher told me years ago, if you want to be forgiven you must ask for it. You must exhibit remorse and apologise, she said.
However, she reminded me it is human to forgive, even the vilest of acts.
Can anyone please point out the moment Najib apologised to the Malaysian people?
Malaysians have seen him ride bikes, lift weights and eat his chocolates but nowhere in his vast and colourful collection of videos has the sixth prime minister submitted himself to the rakyat and said he is sorry.
While the pardons process is complex and legal, please do indulge the plain-speaking Malaysians who may lack the comprehension of complexities or fail to be erudite about the law. But they ask, are apologies from the mighty beyond the rakyat to expect?
Timing and Zahid
While a Najib apology is unlikely, a Najib release is equally unlikely before the six state elections are completed in midyear.
Neither Pakatan nor Umno want Najib to be a campaign distraction.
The talk about Najib’s release also test the waters. On how much the Malaysian public is willing to forgive in order to let the present unity government operate without the fear of PAS-dominated Perikatan Nasional (PN) to usurp the current progressive set-up.
Which leads to a discussion about Deputy Prime Minister and Umno President Zahid Hamidi. His corruption cases are coming to a close and manoeuvres may be necessary to rationalise his situation.
If Zahid is vital to the survival of the unity government, can public sentiments be placated? To know that, they have to see how Najib’s situation plays out in the court of public perception.
There’s a secondary game in play to read the mood of the people.
Freer than free
Prison is not fun. The pain of the Najib family is real. First-class flyers are not exempt from feeling longing and abandonment.
It is not unusual for national leaders to be pardoned for crimes when in office. From Nixon to pick any Korean president in the past 20 years.
But none of them participated in a scandal with the depth, scale and recklessness as 1MDB.
There should be no easy path to reconciliation over this conviction.
No man or family is above the country, its people. To reconcile, to initiate the process, the man has to come to terms with his acts.
The prime minister has to understand that to act ahead of public sentiment on this may end up giving his administration a black eye.
*This is the personal opinion of the columnist. - Malay Mail, 13/4/2023
Lawyer says Agong acts on advice of Pardons Board, including PM, ahead of fresh bid for Najib's freedom
Zainur Zakaria says the prime minister and other members of the Pardons Board will ultimately decide what to advise the king.
A senior lawyer has disagreed with a claim that the power of pardon is ultimately the sole discretion of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, ahead of an audience by Umno to plead for the freedom of jailed former leader Najib Razak.
Zainur Zakaria, who was once part of Anwar Ibrahim's defence team, said the Agong was expected to act on the advice of the Pardons Board, which includes the prime minister.
"The YDPA (Agong) does not act as a court to review court decisions.
Hassan had said that as long as Anwar does not interfere in the process of pardon, there was no question of his administration's survival coming under threat in the event of Najib leaving jail.
But Zainur said as a member of the Pardons Board, Anwar would be part of the decision-making process to advise the Agong on whether Najib should be granted a pardon.
Earlier today, Anwar said there was no conflict of interest despite his involvement in the process of considering a royal pardon for Najib.
Some analysts had warned that the renewed bid for a royal pardon for Najib could spell trouble for Anwar's coalition government, formed last year after Umno president Ahmad Zahid Hamidi committed the 26 MPs from his party to back the PKR leader for the top office.
They also pointed out that Najib's influence in Umno was stronger than that of Zahid, and that the outcome of the pardon process would ultimately affect the Umno president.
The Umno Supreme Council yesterday criticised last week's Federal Court decision dismissing Najib's bid for a review of his conviction in the SRC International case, for which he is currently serving 12 years at Kajang Prison.
The five-panel bench headed by judge Abdul Rahman Sebli had dismissed the review application in a 4-1 majority decision.
Abdul Rahman, the sole dissenting judge, however opined that it was wrong for the Federal Court panel headed by Chief Justice Tengku Maimun Tuan Mat not to allow more time for Najib's newly appointed counsel to prepare for the final appeal in August last year.
Zainur meanwhile said it would not make sense for Najib's lawyer to use Abdul Rahman's view in future appeals.
"Why should the Pardons Board and the Agong take into account this
sole dissenting judgment and reject the four majority judgments in
considering Najib's petition?" said Zainur, a former vice-president of
PKR's predecessor Parti Keadilan Nasional. - Malaysia Now, 8/4/2023
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment