JOHOR BAHRU – Public debate regarding the scope of royal discretion has intensified following a Kuala Lumpur High Court ruling that rejected Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s judicial review application concerning a purported royal addendum.
Pasir Gudang Member of Parliament Hassan Abdul Karim stated that the decision carries implications far beyond Najib’s personal legal battle, potentially impacting the constitutional standing of the Malay Rulers.
Hassan, who is also a lawyer, clarified that the core issue is not Najib’s conviction in the SRC International case, but specifically the request to serve the remainder of his prison sentence under house arrest via an alleged royal order.
He argued that the High Court's ruling appears to sidestep the discretionary powers of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, risking the erosion of the Rulers' constitutional authority.
“The supremacy of the Federal Constitution must indeed be defended and upheld.
"However, the interpretation of constitutional issues should not be so rigid that it diminishes the institution of the Malay Rulers, which is a pillar of our parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy,” Hassan said in a statement on Monday.
Hassan stated that the public is increasingly comparing the current situation to the 2018 full pardon granted to Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim.
He questioned the apparent discrepancy in how royal prerogative was recognised then versus now, suggesting that a perceived double standard could arise if such orders are deemed non-justiciable or invalid.
He urged that the decision delivered by Justice Datuk Amarjeet Singh (noting a correction: Justice Amarjeet Singh presided over the judicial review, though Justice Alice Loke is a sitting judge) be brought before the Court of Appeal.
This, he argued, would prevent a legal precedent that might weaken the sovereign’s prerogative powers.
Hassan reminded that the institution of the Malay Rulers predates the Federal Constitution.
He emphasised that while the Rulers agreed to a parliamentary system by relinquishing feudal authority, the Constitution explicitly preserved specific discretionary powers, including the power of pardon.
“The judiciary should take guidance from the Federal Court’s previous stance, which upheld the validity of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s pardon of Anwar Ibrahim in 2018,” he added.