The Najib Razak addendum has dominated political commentary and discussion over the last few months. Some see this as a diversion away from the difficulties facing households financially today. Nevertheless, the addendum clearly shows that Anwar has been purposely hiding behind the monarchy over the issue, in an attempt to maintain his own credibility.
Anwar stated that it was Mahathir’s government that investigated and charged Najib Razak over the 1MDB and SRC cases. Muhyiddin’s government took the case to court, and Ismail Sabri’s government incarcerated Najib in Kajang Prison for the largest klepto-theft the world has ever witnessed.
However, it was the Anwar government, the same government that said it would go hard on corruption, that has been working hard to get Najib out of Kajang Prison into detention within the luxury of one of his own homes, or free him altogether. The Anwar government is still made up of the remainder of what was once called the ‘court cluster’ (now conveniently forgotten). Hardly a group of ‘corruption busters’.
Najib’s commutation of his sentence from 12 years to 6 years, and discount on his fine from RM 210 million to RM 55 million has been blamed on the former King or YDPA. The YDPA heads the Pardons Board, but it’s the secretariat that decides what will be presented to the board. This is controlled by the Anwar government. Clearly the government did Najib a big favour by skipping over many other cases waiting, and skimping on the regulatory requirements as well.
With another Pardons Board hearing being set for the next few weeks, the YDPA will be presented with another proposal by the Anwar government. Alternatively, the board my listen to what the YDPA feels might be best. Thus, the result could be any of the above.
No doubt, if the result of the upcoming Pardons Board infuriates Malaysians, the Madani government will play the same old Keystone Cops routine once again and set up the YDPA as the fall guy. Using the YDPA means people can’t discuss or dispute it because to the 3Rs.
This places the monarchy in a very bad light for Anwar’s personal political expediency. The monarchy will be the blame and the reputation of the monarchy could be threatened.
This is a great injustice by Anwar towards the monarchy.
The damage the Anwar government is doing to the monarchy is not just limited to the Najib pardon. The lawfare the government is engaging upon political opposition and critics of the government is abusing the reputation of the monarchy. Using the 3Rs (race, religion, royalty) to attack Madani enemies, especially with the use of sedition, makes it appear, that members of the monarchy are the ones behind this.
The whole concept of the 3Rs has put the monarchy in the line of fire.
The investigations, arrests, and charging of people for sedition is painting the monarchy as a group of old grumps, who don’t like to be criticised. This puts the monarchy in danger of becoming disliked and hated by the people, undoing the great work they have been doing over the last few years.
Such a portrayal engineered by the Madani lawfare department is potentially damaging to the monarchy.
If the Madani government goes too far in using the monarchy as a shield and tool for attack of its enemies, this could debase the monarchy’s position of respect in society.
Madani playing divisive politics using the monarchy as a ‘chess board piece’ is dangerous and is beginning to damage harmony within society, for the purposes of cheap political advantage.
If this is overplayed in the next Pardons Board meeting, Anwar’s own government could become a victim of its own game. There are some within the ruling families who have had enough.
Subscribe Below:
ON THE QUESTION OF HOUSE ARREST BY THE PARDONS BOARD
QUESTION: CAN A PARDONS BOARD REDUCE A JAIL SENTENCE TO A “HOUSE ARREST” FOLLOWING THE LEGAL PRINCIPLE OF “ ROYAL PREROGATIVES
OF MERCY?”
See here the Law in NSW, Australia: https://dcj.nsw.gov.au/documents/legal-and-justice/royal-prerogative-of-mercy/Royal_prerogative_of_mercy_-_Fact_sheet1.pdf
The answer is NO. A Pardons Board does NOT have the AUTHORITY to reduce a Jail Sentence to House Arrest
( Reason? See no. 3 below on PREROGATIVES OF MERCY).
To change to House Arrest from a Jail Sentence by the PARDONS BOARD is amounting to CHANGING THE CHARACTER of the Court’s sentence.
But a PAROLE BOARD can decide if a prisoner should be released on parole.
WHY?
Generally, the prerogative of mercy takes one of the following four forms
1. a free pardon
2. commutation or a conditional pardon substituting one form of punishment for another
3. remission, REDUCING the amount of a sentence WITHOUT CHANGING ITS CHARACTER
4. release on licence/early release to parole.
EXPLANATION
In Australia, a PAROLE BOARD decides if a prisoner can be released on parole. The board considers the sentence imposed by the court and whether the prisoner has served enough time. A prisoner can only be considered for parole if they apply for it.
A parole officer supervises prisoners who are released on parole. The parole officer may visit the prisoner at home and ask them to complete certain tasks, such as community work or drug tests.