Pardon or remission? A mysterious process that evokes mixed bag of reactions.
This article had appeared in the scoop.com
KUALA LUMPUR: The criticisms as well as the memes and jokes are out on the “Rahmah” discounts on the sentence of ex-prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
For a month now the talk of Najib’s pardon and impending release have reached fever pitch.
On February 2, the Pardons Board announced that Najib will serve half his 12-year sentence for corruption in the SRC International Sdn Bhd case. This means he will be released on August 23, 2028.
Meanwhile, the RM210 million fine imposed was also reduced to RM50 million. However, if the fine is not paid, the period of imprisonment will be increased by another year whereby his release will be on August 23, 2029.
Understandably politicians are treading carefully as the Pardons Board which sat on Monday to deliberate and decide his fate is headed by the King.
This was one of the last acts, if not the last duty, of Al-Sultan Abdullah Ri’ayatuddin Al-Mustafa Billah Shah who had ended his term as Yang Di-Pertuan Agong on Tuesday.
The Pardons Board’s decision has now come under the spotlight with demands to explain the decision.
It would be prudent for an explanation as the alternative is unhealthy speculation that we are witnessing now, which can bring the royal institution into disrepute.
Meanwhile, the outrage against Najib’s impending release has been juxtaposed with current Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s own pardon for sodomy charges on May 16, 2018 when Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad was prime minister.
That pardon was met largely with jubilation and it paved the way for Anwar’s return to active politics and ultimately becoming the nation’s 10th prime minister.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim’s pardon had largely been met with jubilation. Anwar’s supporters have always viewed him as a political prisoner while Najib, a bandit.
However, Najib too has his own supporters who believed he did not get a fair trial as he was prevented from adducing new evidence and the purported conflict of interest of trial judge Datuk Nazlan Ghazali.
Both Anwar and Najib had pled miscarriage of justice. But while Anwar received a full pardon, Najib at best got a commuted sentence.
So does this mean he received a remission, not a pardon in the way we understand it?
Najib, who is also former finance minister, still has three other court cases pending for alleged corruption involving RM2.3 billion of 1MDB funds; misappropriation of RM6.6 billion in relation to the International Petroleum Investment Company; and money-laundering charges involving RM27 million of SRC International funds.
If he is found guilty of any or all those charges, the pardon he received yesterday will have no bearing on the fresh convictions.
Former Selangor menteri besar Datuk Seri Harun Idris had served five years in prison for embezzlement before being pardoned. – Allahyarham Dato’ Harun Idris Facebook pic, February 3, 2024
Najib and Anwar are not the only high-profile pardons. Over the years, we have seen Selangor menteri besar Datuk Seri Harun Idris receiving a pardon a month before his actual release for embezzlement of Umno funds to among others fund a boxing match between heavyweight giants Muhammad Ali and Joe Bugner in Kuala Lumpur.
Harun served five years in prison before his release.
Likewise, former culture, youth and sports minister Datuk Mokhtar Hashim was released after nine years in jail following a clemency, and then, a full pardon for the murder of his political rival Negri Sembilan state assembly speaker Datuk Mohamad Taha Talib.
Incidentally, Mokhtar was replaced by Anwar as minister following the conviction.
Former culture, youth and sports minister Datuk Mokhtar Hashim was released after nine years in jail following a clemency, and then, a full pardon for murder.
Over the years hundreds if not thousands of prisoners have been fortunate enough to receive pardons. They include robbers, murderers and drug traffickers.
How and why the board comes to its decisions are never revealed but one learns it is a case-by-case basis where the personal situations of the convicts, their contribution to society and the circumstances leading to the offences themselves weigh considerably during the deliberations.
While judges are required to explain their judgment, the Pardons Board does not need to. One can question a judge but never the King.
Whether this veil of mystery needs to be lifted is a delicate subject. But the pardons process is also not a buffet for cherry-picking. It cannot work for the convenience and appeasement of the same people who are now unhappy that it also works for others.
Terence Fernandez is Group Editor in Chief of Big Boom Media which publishes The Scoop
