YOURSAY | ’It could undermine our democracy and monarchy.’

Ex-Bersatu leader: Royal addendum could cause constitutional crisis

Vijay47: There appear to be two points that clash head-on, the first being the now famous addendum, and the second, that delicate matter of house arrest.

The palace has explained that the addendum exists, though unfortunately, there is no explanation of what “exists” means.

The government has stated that the issue of house arrest was not discussed at the Pardons Board deliberations, only the imprisonment and fine were.

Given this “failure to discuss”, what weight does the addendum carry?

Lawyer Mohamed Haniff Khatri Abdullah has kindly informed that having been signed by His Majesty, the addendum bears all necessary authority since the Agong has absolute authority on all matters touching on pardons.

No doubt the veteran lawyer must be right, I hardly qualify to pursue this point.

My curiosity is related to the house arrest.

Thank you, former Bersatu supreme council member Muhammad Faiz Na'aman, for raising this matter that all of us seem to have overlooked.

What does it mean, what is the depth of its ramifications? Nobody appears to be any wiser on it - many claim to have never encountered it previously.

Does it refer to a single place of abode or does it mean a slew of addresses that the now forgiven felon could describe as his “house” wherever in the world it may be?

I am sure that the humble rakyat will soon learn.

PM: Based only on what is reported in the news I believe this addendum raises some serious questions about the justice process and the constitutional system in Malaysia.

Firstly, it raises concerns about fairness and equality before the law. If elite prisoners are given special treatment, it could undermine public trust in the legal system.

Secondly, it challenges the principle of separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches.

This addendum seems to bypass the Pardons Board process established by law.

Thirdly, it raises questions about transparency and accountability in decision-making.

The lack of clear information about how this addendum was issued and why it didn't go through the proper channels raises concerns about potential abuse of power.

Overall, I think this issue needs to be addressed carefully and transparently.

A fair and just solution needs to be reached to ensure the integrity of the legal system and maintain public confidence in it.

This is just my personal opinion and perspective based on the news above.

The final decision rests with the court and the ongoing legal process.

Let's hope for the best!

Proarte: The idea of an addendum sounds like an afterthought, which was included after the Pardons Board meeting.

If the addendum was discussed in the Pardons Board meeting, why then was the addendum not minuted at the same meeting?

There seems to be a serious dereliction of duty and it has to be resolved without any obfuscation or lying because it has the potential to undermine our democracy and the monarchy.

The monarchy in Malaysia has powers granted to them by the Constitution, no more, no less and they are sworn to defend it.

The constitutional principle is that the Agong acts on advice and cannot act arbitrarily without reference to the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land.

This brings us back to the Pardons Board whose duty it is to advise the Agong.

The Agong has the absolute power to reject its recommendations but his decision has to go through the due process of being advised by the Pardons Board.

The Constitution would not provide for a Pardons Board headed by the Agong to deliberate on prisoner applications for clemency if the Agong was given the power to make arbitrary rulings outside the ambit of the board.

If the board members claim the topic of house arrest was not discussed and this is corroborated by the fact it was not minuted, then we await clarification from the former Agong's office over this huge anomaly.

Malaysians do not want to be taken back to medieval times where there is no concept of the rule of law or human rights such that we function by “royal decree”.

Madani needs to show Malaysians we are moving forward in the 21st century for the benefit of all Malaysians.

Currently, there is a feeling that the rakyat are not “bosses" but mere pawns in a game of thrones by the ruling Malay elites or Bossku running riot in Malaysia.

Fairperson: The court has clearly given former prime minister Najib Abdul Razak a chance to present his case.

It simply means due process will take place in the court for the prosecution and defence to present their arguments in court for the learned judge/judges to decide.

Whether the existence of a royal addendum is there or not is secondary at this moment.

The question lingering in the mind of most logical-thinking Malaysians is this, why a high-profile convicted criminal of the worst kind in the history of Malaysia is given so many privileges and preferential treatment by the higher-ups?

Putting aside emotions, patronage, and loyalty will tell anyone that Najib deserves to be in, not out.

No such constitutional crisis will take place as long as the court does its work based on conscience and the Constitution.

OrangePanther1466: Faiz has made a very valid point. These crooked elites are testing the boundaries of our Constitution.

In the process, it has evoked the feeling of double standards between the elites and proletariats.

Can we ever hope that Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim will rise to the occasion to mollify the people's anger and anxiety?

Quigonbond: I think at most Najib's successful appeal simply means it will be established or otherwise whether there is a royal addendum.

Even if there is, the current Agong has said all goes through the Pardon's Board.

So, the question is, did the previous Agong decide for the previous Pardon's Board? If he did not, then the court will eventually find such an addendum to be invalid.

BrownLion2645: A good statement by Faiz, better than any of the Pakatan Harapan leaders have made to date.

Why produce a letter from the Pahang palace but not the original copy of the addendum?

Why is there no comment on the existence of the addendum from the attorney-general and prime minister?

Faiz is right on the legality of enforcement of the addendum.

Maybe the Pardons Board, with the current Agong, need to be involved to clear the stalemate since the powers that be want to play safe.

Just a Malaysian: This issue has been weaponised to bring down the unity government.

The first attack came when PAS accused DAP of treason. These politicians have no concern about the importance of protecting our Constitution.

Politics is destroying the foundation of this country.

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paying subscribers can post comments. In the past year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now.

These comments are compiled to reflect the views of Malaysiakini subscribers on matters of public interest. Malaysiakini does not intend to represent these views as fact.