High Court rules against Najib Razak’s house arrest request; former PM stays at Kajang Prison facility
PETALING JAYA: Former Prime Minister Najib Razak will remain imprisoned at Kajang Prison after the Kuala Lumpur High Court ruling found that an alleged royal directive for his house arrest violated constitutional procedures.
According to various reports, High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching ruled today that the supplementary order attributed to the previous Yang di-Pertuan Agong failed to meet the legal standards set out in Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
The judge explained that the purported addendum was never discussed or approved during the 61st Federal Territories Pardons Board meeting, making it constitutionally deficient and unenforceable.
“Because there was no compliance with Article 42, the order lacks validity,” Justice Loke reportedly stated. She added that government authorities have neither the authority nor obligation to implement the house arrest directive.
Najib’s legal team, led by Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, immediately announced plans to appeal the ruling.
READ ALSO: Verdict today on Najib’s house arrest bid
The 72-year-old former leader has been incarcerated since August 23, 2022, following his conviction for misusing RM42 million from SRC International Sdn Bhd.
Earlier in 2024, the Federal Territories Pardons Board granted partial clemency, reducing his original 12-year sentence to six years and lowering his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million.
Najib initiated judicial review proceedings in 2023, arguing that authorities were obligated to enforce a supplementary decree placing him under house arrest. His lawyers contended that the pardons board failed to publicly announce this addendum and that the government was acting in contempt by not implementing it.
In January 2024, an appeals court voted 2-1 to allow the alleged addendum as evidence and permitted Najib to proceed with his judicial review application.
However, today’s decision definitively ruled that without proper constitutional process, the house arrest order carries no legal weight. The court made no order regarding legal costs.
