There is much misinformation out there relating to a royal pardon and the Malaysian Bar recognises that this is of public interest under the current climate.

The power to grant pardons by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is encapsulated in Article 42(1) of the Federal Constitution, which stipulates that “The Yang di-Pertuan Agong has the power to grant pardons, reprieves, and respites in respect of all offences which have been tried by court-martial and all offences committed in the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan, and Putrajaya; and the ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri of a state has the power to grant pardons, reprieves, and respites in respect of all other offences committed in his state”.

All individuals found guilty and sentenced, are entitled to seek a royal pardon, but this is sought after all legal remedies have been exhausted.

The composition of the Pardons Board consists of the attorney-general (or his/her representative), the chief minister or menteri besar of the state, and not more than three other members appointed by the ruler or Yang di-Pertua Negeri (Article 42(5) of the Federal Constitution).

Further, Article 42(9) stipulates that before tendering its advice on any matter, a Pardons Board shall consider “any written opinion which the attorney-general may have delivered” on the case.

However, the Pardons Board may only offer advice, and such advice is not binding on the Yang di-Pertuan Agong / ruler / Yang di-Pertua Negeri - this was settled in the High Court decision in Karpal Singh v Sultan of Selangor [1988].

Simply put, the function of the Pardons Board is merely advisory in nature and the decision to pardon or otherwise by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong/ruler/Yang di-Pertua Negeri is not subject to judicial review, as demonstrated in the case of Juraimi bin Husin v Board of Pardons, State of Pahang & Ors [2002].

IndigoCamel7131 : Altantuya begged for mercy pleading for her life n yet they were instructed to C4 her. No mercy for NR n his corrupt family.

Man on the Silver Mountain : Najib’s crime is a betrayal of the highest office that he held. It is a betrayal to the country, the King, and the people. Whatever sentiment that we have, it cannot hide that fact. He and his family should be grateful that he was given through the process of the court. 

That in itself was a gentle mercy to him. In many countries, the crime that he committed, would result in people’s anger and retribution against him. The law of the street would prevail, or the successor of power not taken too kindly to keep him alive. It is not simply because of his crime but because of the position that he held which affected the entire country. 

Kings and Presidents had been subject to the harsh consequence of the law. Najib should be no different. A pardon for him would be simply as seen that it is alright for a PM to betray the country, the King, and the people, no less. That is why even from outside of the law, his pardon cannot be sustained.