Explained Why Did Najib Lose His House Arrest Bid At The High Court

---

 
The High Court ruled that there was no provision in the law to place Datuk Seri Najib Razak under house arrest. — Picture by Yusof IsaKUALA LUMPUR, Dec 24 — The High Court said no on Monday to Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s attempt to serve the rest of his six-year jail term at home.
Here's Malay Mail's simplified version of High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching’s 41-page written judgment, which explains why Najib failed his court bid for house arrest:
One big legal question to answer  
Najib wanted the court to order the government to carry out the former Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s add-on order dated January 29, 2024 for him to be placed on house arrest.
In that written add-on order, the Agong said he was adding on to his decision in a January 29, 2024 Pardons Board meeting on Najib, and that his additional order is for Najib to “serve the rest of his sentence via house arrest”.
The High Court said there is only one key issue it has to decide: Is this add-on order valid? 
Firstly, what are the facts? 
This is what happened in the Federal Territories Pardons Board meeting on January 29, 2024, based on the minutes or written records of the meeting:
The former Yang di-Pertuan Agong proposed a full pardon for Najib, but majority of the Pardons Board’s members disagreed;Agong then proposes 50 per cent reduction of Najib’s jail term;After hearing the Pardons Board’s views, Agong decides to reduce Najib’s jail term from 12 years to six years, and to reduce his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million.Why the High Court said the add-on house arrest order is not valid  
What the High Court concluded from the Pardons Board meeting minutes:
The Agong made only one decision in the meeting: To reduce Najib’s jail term and fine.Was “house arrest” for Najib mentioned, discussed, decided during the Pardons Board meeting: No.Pardons Board gave advice on proposal for Najib’s full pardon and 50 per cent reduction in jail term but did not have the opportunity to give advice on house arrest.The High Court said the Agong is a “constitutional monarch”, or a king who carries out his powers according to the Federal Constitution. 
So the Agong’s decisions on pardons and to grant mercy to prisoners must follow the procedures in the Federal Constitution’s Article 42.
Under Article 42, the Agong can only make these decisions after getting the Pardons Board’s advice. 
This means the Agong cannot make such decisions outside of the Pardons Board meeting and cannot decide without the Pardons Board, the High Court said.
Ultimately, the High Court said Najib’s add-on house arrest order “is not a valid order”, because it did not follow the procedures in Article 42.
The Malaysian government and the prisons do not have to put Najib on house arrest as the court has declared that they have no duty to enforce the invalid add-on order. - malaymail

---