Guest Editorial: PM Anwar handling of the Royal Addendum: A failure to own up to responsibility?
Prof. Dr. Ramasamy
Somebody is lying here. Time to get to the truth.
The refusal of Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim to disclose details about the so-called royal addendum purportedly assented to by the former Yang di-Pertuan Agong has raised questions about his transparency and political courage.
In responding to questions in Parliament about this contentious issue, which relates to a proposal for house arrest for former Prime Minister Najib Razak, Anwar claimed he could not comment as the matter is sub judice, given the ongoing appeal in the Court of Appeals.
The royal addendum reportedly followed the royal pardon that halved Najib’s prison sentence and reduced his fine.
While the High Court dismissed Najib’s family’s attempt at a judicial review, the issue remains politically and legally significant.
Anwar not only invoked sub judice but also emphasized that the royal addendum was a prerogative of the King.
However, this justification has been criticized as disingenuous.
Former Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) chief Latheefa Koya correctly pointed out that while certain decisions—such as appointing the Prime Minister—are solely the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s prerogative, matters like royal pardons and related decisions fall under constitutional provisions where the monarch acts on the advice of the Prime Minister.
Anwar’s assertion that the royal addendum was purely the King’s prerogative overlooks the constitutional reality.
If anything, it gives the impression that Anwar is unwilling to take responsibility for the government’s role in the matter.
As Prime Minister, it is likely that Anwar has briefed the Agong on the significant public interest surrounding the addendum.
Yet, he appears hesitant to admit that the government’s advice, delivered via the Pardons Board, played a critical role in the decision.
Contrast this with the forthrightness of former Prime Minister Dr. Mahathir Mohamad, who, for better or worse, was willing to take ownership of controversial decisions.
Anwar, on the other hand, appears evasive, despite his prior advocacy for reforms and accountability.
The reality is that the term “royal” in the addendum does not negate the government’s involvement.
If Najib’s release or house arrest was the intended outcome, why resort to obfuscation?
If some UMNO leaders have already benefited from discharges not amounting to acquittal (DNAA), why shy away from openly addressing Najib’s case?
By playing this game of hide-and-seek, Anwar risks damaging his credibility. If the government indeed advised the Agong on the royal addendum, why not own up to it? After all, the public can see through political pretensions.
For someone like me—an ardent supporter of Anwar during Pakatan Harapan’s brief administration—it is deeply disappointing to see this lack of candor. Even then, my views often conflicted with those of DAP leadership, as I strongly believed Anwar was the right person to lead the country.
Anwar must recognize that political expediency cannot justify a lack of transparency.
If the royal addendum was indeed based on the government’s advice to the Agong, he should admit it plainly. The public deserves honesty, not prevarication.
Tell the truth and shame the devil!
Prof. Dr. P Ramasamy
Malaysian, 75 years of age. Former professor of political economy UKM. Former Senior Research Fellow, ISEAS. Former Visiting Professor, University Kassel, Germany. Deputy Chief Minister Penang, 2008-2023. Former member of parliament, 2008-2013. Three terms Perai state assemblyman. Former Chairman of Penang Hindu Endowments Board. Involved in peace talks in Aceh and Sri Lanka.International peace consultant. Chairman of political party Urimai.
Subscribe Below:
The royal prerogative is indeed the Kings prerogative. It may be exercised on the advise of a minister or ministers of the crown individually or collectively but it remains the Kings prerogative. What constitutional "experts" appear to think is that if indeed the Malaysian constitution provides that the King 'must' act on the advise of his ministers ( a derivative of the Westminster convention on the royal prerogative), there is nothing in the constitution that invalidates the Kings unilateral decision (if he makes one) ignoring the advise or without obtaining the advise of his prime minister or ministers. The King may reject the advise of his ministers on a number of matters especially where it touchs on matters of religion and culture.
The issue of DS Najib's farcical trial and the blatant denial of natural justice to DS Najib in his trials is a hot potato. It won't go away it can't go away. It remains a blot on the Malaysian legal system and on its judiciary.
Anwar knows when he was sacked from umno but not jailed from sept 2nd to sept 20th, the people rose and from there onwards tun m had problems keeping umno relevant.
He knows if najib is let out of prison, the malays will support umno and zahid will be ousted.
Najib will then through his proxy, topple zahid and umno gps grs mic and mca will leave pakatan harapan.
Anwar will be finished.