Is Pas President Implying Najib Was Not Fairly Treated

---

In commenting on the recent issue on the royal addendum involving former premier Najib Abdul Razak’s case, PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang said his party did not find the decree unusual.
Perhaps he was right. Since our Federal Constitution recognises the principle of a royal pardon, the existence of any royal pardon is not unusual.
However, the issue of royal pardon in Najib’s case is not only confined to the issue of the decision to grant him a royal pardon. On the other hand, it also entails the issue of the decision-making process in reaching such a decision.
The decision might be right, but the decision-making process might be allegedly flawed. A just decision deals with substantive justice. A fair decision-making process entails procedural justice. These twin justices are vital.
Under such circumstances, was it wrong for people to raise these valid questions - Why was Najib’s application for a royal pardon accelerated? Why was he given preferential treatment? Why was the principle of equal protection of the law which is enshrined in our Federal Constitution not strictly observed in Najib’s application for pardon?
It is rather unusual when the PAS president could easily pass judgment against those who did not subscribe to his view. His statement, with the greatest respect, seems to suggest there should be only one view on this issue. Worse, that view must be a view shared by him. Period.
He was reported to have said: “Those who reject it are either ignorant of religion or driven by vengeance and impatience when in power.”
Such a statement presupposes that in this case there should have been only one view. Those who possess other views are, in his estimation, either ignorant of religion or driven by vengeance and impatience when in power.
Islam and freedom of speech
As far as I know, Islam has been consistently advocating for freedom of speech. And the diversity of opinions is something which Islam has zealously cherished.
In fact, one of the Muslim rulers - Umar Abd Aziz- used to say “I don't like it if the prophet’s companions did not have different opinions in any matters”. This statement reflects the epitome of Islamic civilisation.
That is why Islam has no qualms about the emergence of different schools of thought even in matters relating to theological debates, jurisprudences and Quranic exegesis and modes of recitations.
PAS president also referred to the historical event of the conquest of Mecca, during which Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) demonstrated complete forgiveness towards those who had previously opposed Islam.
Yes, he was right to say that because Prophet Muhammad opted to forgive his enemies and, in turn, offer clemency during the conquest of Mecca. In fact, in doing so, he emulated what Prophet Joseph did.
However, the historical records also showed that Prophet Muhammad did execute punishments against some of the Meccan political leaders and criminals. And I believe the PAS president is fully aware of this incontrovertible fact.
False analogy
The Marang MP also quoted verses from the Quran, including Surah al-Ma’idah and Surah al-Baqarah, which call on Muslims to act justly, even towards their enemies, and prioritise forgiveness as a sign of piety.
With due respect to cite these verses in defending Najib is highly misplaced. It is a false analogy. Yes, Islam advocates for absolute justice. But the quoted verses have nothing to do with Najib’s case.
Perhaps he should have quoted this hadith. In the hadith which is reported in Sahih al-Bukhari, it reads "Usama approached the prophet on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft).
The prophet said, ‘The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet) did that (ie theft), I would cut off her hand’."
Najib had committed serious crimes when he was in public office and he was unanimously convicted and sentenced to appropriate punishments by our courts. He was not arbitrarily punished. He had his days in court. He was given chances to defend himself.
The conviction against Najib was not made pursuant to emotions. It was purely based on evidence. This is how the justice system works in Malaysia.
When Najib was convicted and punished by the court for committing heinous crimes the courts also took into consideration justice for the rakyat.
After all, the court must strike a balance between justice meted out to the accused like Najib and justice to be delivered to the public.
Is the PAS president implying Najib was not fairly treated? - Mkini
MOHAMED HANIPA MAIDIN is a former deputy minister of law.
The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of MMKtT.

---