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

On October 14, the High Court denied former Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's request to stay his 15-year prison sentence and RM11.38 billion fine related to the 1MDB corruption case.

Justice Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin emphasized that public interest considerations, including the gravity of the offenses, outweighed Najib's appeal for a stay.

Currently, Najib is serving his sentence in Kajang prison due to an additional conviction in the SRC International trial and remains there pending further developments.

The situation raises questions about the precedence of royal pardons over court decisions, especially regarding public interest.

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.

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.

For Malaysian manufacturers, clarity can make all the difference — Ben Lim

Every child has the right to breathe clean air — Sanja Saranovic

Is America heading towards a second revolution? A timely and provocative book by Lee Boon Chye — Phar Kim Beng

Zahid says Malaysia ready to help Indonesia fight forest fires after Prabowo accepts foreign aid

Perlis MACC recovers nearly RM700,000 through forfeitures since 2024

El Niño could hit fishermen, fish farms as temperatures soar to 40°C, says Mat Sabu

10月14日，高等法院驳回了前首相拿督斯里纳吉·拉扎克关于暂缓执行与1MDB贪污案相关的15年监禁和113.8亿令吉罚款的请求。

努尔·鲁韦纳·穆罕默德·努尔丁法官强调，公共利益的考量，包括罪行的严重性，超过了纳吉布要求暂缓执行的上诉。

目前，纳吉因在 SRC 国际公司案中被判有罪，正在加影监狱服刑，等待进一步的进展。

这种情况引发了人们对皇室赦免权高于法院判决权的质疑，尤其是在涉及公共利益的情况下。

10 月 16 日——高等法院周三（10 月 14 日）驳回了前首相拿督斯里纳吉·拉扎克提出的暂缓执行其在 1MDB 贪污案中被判处的 15 年监禁和 113.8 亿令吉罚款的申请。

努尔·鲁韦纳·穆罕默德·努尔丁法官裁定，纳吉布未能证明存在足以证明其上诉期间暂缓执行的特殊情况。

这位博学的法官表示，在权衡控辩双方的论点后，罪行的严重性是一个更重要的公共利益考量因素。

公众利益是“首要”考虑因素。

当被问及这位前首相目前在哪里服刑时，纳吉的首席律师丹斯里穆罕默德·沙菲·阿卜杜拉回答说：“他仍在加影监狱服刑，因为我们还没有筹集到5000万令吉的罚款。一旦罚款支付完毕，他将被转移到家中。”

但纳吉布目前身陷囹圄，不仅是因为他正在服刑，等待对定罪和量刑的上诉结果，还因为他目前正在服刑，这是由于他在 SRC 国际公司案中的另一项定罪所致。

既然联邦直辖区赦免委员会已宣布，纳吉布可以在缴纳 5000 万令吉罚款等条件的约束下，居家监禁至 2028 年 8 月 23 日，以完成其减刑后的 SRC 刑期，那么在他 1MDB 案的刑期尚未被暂缓执行的情况下，他是否还能被允许居家监禁呢？

当皇室赦免与法院判决发生冲突时，以哪一项为准？

难道公众利益不应该是首要考虑因素吗？

* 这是作者或出版方的个人观点，并不一定代表《马来邮报》的观点。

对于马来西亚制造商而言，清晰的沟通至关重要——林本

每个孩子都享有呼吸清洁空气的权利——桑娅·萨拉诺维奇

美国是否正走向第二次革命？李文才所著的这本适时而又发人深省的著作——法金本

扎希德表示，在普拉博沃接受外国援助后，马来西亚准备帮助印尼扑灭森林火灾。

自2024年以来，玻璃市反贪污委员会通过没收财产追回了近70万令吉。

马特·萨布表示，厄尔尼诺现象可能导致气温飙升至40摄氏度，对渔民和养鱼场造成冲击。