Federal Court defers decision in AGC's appeal linked to Najib's house arrest bid
Senior Federal Counsel Shamsul Bolhassan told a three-judge panel, chaired by Chief Judge of Malaya Justice Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, that the AGC was disputing the manner in which the document was tendered to the court in Najib's judicial review application at the High Court.
He contended that Najib must comply with the rules and regulations of the court in tendering new evidence.
"We maintain our stand. We rely on our submission and leave it to the court," he said.
The apex court was hearing submissions from parties in the AG's appeal to set aside a 2-1 majority ruling by the Court of Appeal on Jan 6 that remitted Najib's case back to the High Court to be heard on its merits.
Other judges on the bench are Federal Court judges Justices Zabariah Mohd Yusof and Hanipah Farikullah.
Najib's lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah submitted that the duty of candour in judicial review does not require the respondent (Najib) to obtain the copy of the addendum order as it was the role of the AG to confirm or deny the existence of the addendum at the leave stage.
"The question of whether or not the addendum order was not obtained with reasonable diligence during the proceedings before the High Court is a non-issue because the respondent's deponents clearly affirmed that they had no capacity to have a copy of the Addendum Order due to its secrecy at the material time.
"The respondent submitted that he had reasonably attempted with reasonable diligence to gain confirmations on the existence of the addendum order," Muhammad Shafee said.
According to Muhammad Shafee, the addendum document was only obtained by the applicant's son, Datuk Mohamad Nizar, after the High Court's decision and it was subject to a condition that it could not be used without the palace's consent.
"This restriction is crucial, even if the document was in hand, the respondent was not legally or ethically free to use it until permission was granted. Once permission was granted on Dec 2, 2024, the respondent immediately filed the affidavit in court. This promptness reflects that there was no unnecessary delay once the document became usable.
"In fact, the respondent can be said to exercise beyond its legal duty to produce the same in assisting this court," he added.
Justice Hasnah then told parties that the court will deliver its decision on a later date.
"We'll let you know of the date and our decision.
"Thank you for all the submission and all the authorities submitted. Court is adjourned," she said.
On Jan 6, in a 2-1 majority decision, the Court of Appeal remitted the case on Najib's claim of the existence of an additional document purportedly allowing him to serve the remainder of his six-year prison sentence under house arrest to the High Court to be heard on its merits.
This decision overturned the High Court's earlier ruling, which had dismissed Najib's application for leave to commence a judicial review regarding the alleged additional document.
On April 28, the Federal Court granted leave to the AG to appeal against the Court of Appeal's decision.
Najib is currently serving a six-year jail sentence in connection with the SRC International Sdn Bhd case, following the Federal Court's dismissal of his appeal and review application.
In February last year, the Pardons Board reduced his initial 12-year jail sentence and fine of RM210mil to six years and RM50mil fine.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Malay Mail
2 hours ago
- Malay Mail
Let Anwar's application for referral of constitutional questions to Federal Court take its course — Hafiz Hassan
AUGUST 12 — In 'If Anwar's constitutional questions are preposterous, absurd and legal nonsense, let the court say it' I wrote that if the constitutional questions proposed to be referred by Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim for a ruling by the Federal Court were preposterous, absurd and legal nonsense, let the court having the ultimate authority say it. The constitutional questions were It was submitted by Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim that he was being selectively exposed to litigation in a manner that violates the principle of equal protection, implying that the Prime Minister should receive distinct treatment under the law. — Bernama pic proposed in the civil action commenced by Yusoff Rawther against Anwar in the latter's personal capacity. The civil action was up for trial — the action having been filed at the High Court in July 2021, prior to Anwar's appointment as the Prime Minister in November 2022 with the trial having been fixed on June 6, 2025 — but Anwar, by an application on May 23, 2025, sought to: a) refer constitutional questions to the Federal Court (see below) – touching on whether a sitting Prime Minister enjoys certain immunities or protections from civil litigation relating to pre-office conduct — under O 92 r 4 of the Rules of Court 2012 (ROC) and/or Article 128(2) of the Federal Constitution and/or Section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 (CJA); and b) stay the trial on June 16 pending the Federal Court's determination of those constitutional questions. At the hearing of the application, it was submitted by Anwar's legal team that the continuation of the civil action engages constitutional issues concerning the interpretation and effect of Articles 5, 8, 39, 40, and 43 of the Federal Constitution. It was further suggested that a sitting Prime Minister should be insulated from the burdens of civil litigation, and that the High Court ought to refer these issues for the determination of the Federal Court pursuant to Article 128(2) of the Federal Constitution. Eight questions were listed in the application for referral to the Federal Court. The grounds that were said to be critical constitutional issues were namely: a) Article 5(1) of the Federal Constitution — right to life and personal liberty: It was contended by Anwar that being subjected to a civil trial while holding the office of Prime Minister infringes his liberty interests under Article 5(1), on the basis that it imposes undue burden and distraction from the discharge of executive functions; b) Article 8(1) of the Federal Constitution — equality before the law: It was submitted by Anwar that he was being selectively exposed to litigation in a manner that violates the principle of equal protection, implying that the Prime Minister should receive distinct treatment under the law; c) Articles 39, 40, and 43 of the Federal Constitution — Executive authority, Yang di-Pertuan Agong to act on advice, and Cabinet: It was argued that the above provisions collectively vest the executive authority of the Federation in the Yang di-Pertuan Agong acting on Cabinet advice, with the Prime Minister at its helm, and that subjecting the Prime Minister to civil litigation while in office undermines or disrupts this constitutional structure; d) doctrine of 'constructive harm': Anwar's counsel introduced this idea — though not anchored on any express constitutional provision, that permitting a Prime Minister to be sued while in office causes 'constructive harm' to the institution of the Executive, and this 'harm' triggered constitutional protection; and e) institutional proportionality: It was argued that the adjudication of politically sensitive private tort claims against the sitting Prime Minister, in the absence of a constitutional scrutiny threshold, violated the principle of institutional proportionality and offended the basic structure of the Federal Constitution by upsetting the functional balance between the Judiciary and the Executive. The application was made notwithstanding that Anwar was ready and willing to proceed with the trial. Anwar does not assert that the action impairs his ability to perform his constitutional functions. He does not also produce any evidence to that effect. It appears that Anwar does not raise immunity as a defence to Yusoff's claim — but I stand corrected on this. What is apparent, however, the application and the grounds are largely exploratory in nature – to test whether the Federal Constitution accords the Prime Minister any form of procedural immunity or protection from civil liability while in office. One may not agree with the proposed constitutional questions — some, even from the legal fraternity, have vilified Anwar and his legal team for the questions — but it was ingenious of Anwar's legal team to have proposed the questions — again, one may not agree with the word 'ingenious'. Be that as it may, High Court Judge Roz Mawar did not buy into Anwar's legal team's arguments, contentions and submissions. After assessing the application and each of the grounds at length, the learned judge said: 'Having considered the application in its entirety, this court is of the view that the constitutional questions framed by the defendant are not real, substantial, or necessary for the disposal of the present suit. The issues raised do not call for the interpretation of any ambiguity in our Federal Constitution, nor do they relate to the validity of any legislation, or the scope of legislative competence under Article 128(2) of our Federal Constitution. 'The principles [are] … clear: that not every question which touches on the Constitution qualifies for referral under Section 84 of the CJA. This court must be satisfied that the constitutional question is both genuine and material to the resolution of the case. The Federal Court is not a forum for speculative or defensive advisory opinions. 'This present application discloses no such question. The suit concerns a personal claim against the defendant for alleged acts occurring prior to his assumption of office. There is no suggestion that the defendant is unable to discharge his constitutional duties, and the defendant has indicated readiness to proceed with trial as scheduled on 16 June 2025. It is this court's considered conclusion that Section 84 of the CJA is not satisfied. This court therefore declines to refer the proposed questions to the Federal Court. 'The application … is hereby dismissed. Cost of RM20,000 is awarded to the plaintiff. Trial to commence on 16 June 2025 as scheduled.' (See Muhammed Yusoff Rawther v Dato' Seri Anwar bin Ibrahim [2025] 10 MLJ 689, 690) So, instead of vilifying Anwar's so-called claim of immunity, which may be misplaced – unless Anwar pleads as such in his defence – let's celebrate the learned High Court judge's independence. Her Ladyship decided against Anwar, who may be sued in his personal capacity, but nonetheless the country's prime minister. Anwar has appealed against the decision and has successfully obtained a stay of the trial pending the outcome of his appeal to the Court of Appeal. Let Anwar's application and its grounds be ventilated in the higher court. Let the application take its legal course. * This is the personal opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of Malay Mail.


Focus Malaysia
3 hours ago
- Focus Malaysia
UMNO man urges swift enforcement of Royal addendum in SRC case
THE Federal Court's confirmation of the existence of a Titah Adendum (Addendum Decree) linked to former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak has reignited debate over his prison sentence, with calls for its immediate enforcement. According to UMNO Tumpat information chief Che Muhammad Redzuan Jihad, a lawyer, the matter should no longer be brought to the High Court, as the highest court had already ruled on its existence. 'The Titah Adendum is an order from the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, not a political document. Prolonged debate only wastes time and confuses the people,' he said, stressing that swift implementation would uphold the dignity of the Malay Rulers. UMNO deputy president Datuk Seri Mohamad Hasan echoed the view, saying there was no need for further litigation after the Federal Court ruling. Nevertheless, lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla told a Malay-language online portal that Najib could begin serving his sentence under house arrest as early as November if the High Court affirms the decree's validity. He noted administrative matters would not hinder enforcement once the court confirms it. Najib is currently serving a 12-year prison sentence for corruption involving SRC International, partially reduced through a royal pardon. Meanwhile, SRC International Sdn Bhd and its subsidiary Gandingan Mentari Sdn Bhd have filed a RM42mil civil suit against Najib. They alleged the funds, intended to secure Malaysia's energy future and benefit pensioners, were diverted into Najib's personal accounts. The High Court trial, before Judge Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin Shah, resumes on Sept 8. 'The facts are stark: the RM42mil of public money, funds meant to secure Malaysia's energy future and intended for the benefit of civil service pensioners, ended up in the personal bank accounts of our former prime minister, the defendants. 'The evidence tells a simple yet damning story: public power was abused and misused,' Kwan Will Sen, company lawyer, said. — Aug 16, 2025 Main photo credit: The Guardian
![[UPDATED] Malaysia's role as Asean Chair recognised internationally, says PM](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fimages%2Farticles%2Fwtchair168_NSTfield_image_socialmedia.var_1755324744.jpg&w=3840&q=100)
![[UPDATED] Malaysia's role as Asean Chair recognised internationally, says PM](/_next/image?url=https%3A%2F%2Fassets.nst.com.my%2Fassets%2FNST-Logo%402x.png%3Fid%3Db37a17055cb1ffea01f5&w=48&q=75)
New Straits Times
4 hours ago
- New Straits Times
[UPDATED] Malaysia's role as Asean Chair recognised internationally, says PM
LARUT: Malaysia's role as Asean Chair in facilitating reconciliation efforts between Thailand and Cambodia following recent border tensions has been recognised internationally, said Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. He said that although there were certain quarters that refused to acknowledge Malaysia's role, the trust placed by the countries involved was clear proof that they held Malaysia's political and economic stability in high regard. "Thank God, in Malaysia our politics are stable and our economic development is respected. So, when disputes arise, the task of reconciliation is entrusted to us. This is a form of international recognition, even if some in Parliament may choose not to acknowledge it — and that is fine," he said. Anwar made the remarks when opening the Madani Dairy Entrepreneur Carnival at Farm Fresh Perak Dairy Complex today. Also present were Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Saarani Mohamad, Agriculture and Food Security Minister Datuk Seri Mohamad Sabu and Education Minister Fadhlina Sidek. Earlier, US Ambassador to Malaysia Edgard D. Kagan was reported to have said that Malaysia had played an important role as Asean Chair in peace efforts between Thailand and Cambodia through the General Boundary Committee (GBC) meeting, following tensions along the border of the two countries. Kagan said that Malaysia's role in organising the meeting demonstrated its leadership in bringing both nations to the table. Meanwhile, Anwar said Malaysia's strong diplomatic relations with foreign countries have brought significant benefits, particularly in creating new economic opportunities in the country. "For example, during the conflict between Cambodia and Thailand, Thai milk could not enter Cambodia, but Farm Fresh milk successfully entered the market. "I am sharing this because our relations with Thailand and Cambodia are good. If Farm Fresh wishes to open a farm in Thailand, we will extend our full cooperation," he said. Anwar also stressed that the government will continue to support initiatives that strengthen the nation's food security, including the dairy industry. Expressing pride in the achievements of local dairy producer Farm Fresh Bhd, he praised the company for its contribution to the dairy sector, job creation for Malaysians, and commitment to corporate social responsibility (CSR). Meanwhile, Farm Fresh chief operations director Azmi Zainal said the company's 828-acre complex in Perak is home to 4,300 dairy cows producing 22,000 litres of milk daily. "In a year, this complex produces 10 million litres of milk, making it the largest and most productive dairy farm in the country," he said, adding that the farm has 150 local workers, most of whom are under 30 years old. Farm Fresh also buys milk from local small farmers at competitive prices.