THE Federal Court today allowed former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to proceed with a judicial review relating to an alleged Royal Addendum by the 16th Yang di-Pertuan Agong.
The Federal Court said there were no appealable errors by the lower court.
“As of now, the addendum order exists and its status, vis-a-vis, validity or whether it is true, needs to be ascertained at the substantive hearing, which we do not consider it right or fair for us to express any view on this point,” Justice Zabariah Mohd Yusof said in reading the panel’s decision today.
Najib's contention over the royal addendum will now be heard in full before another judge at the High Court. Najib, 72, remains in prison for the time being.
The case represents the latest chapter in a long-running legal and constitutional battle, with Najib claiming that the addendum – which purportedly accompanied the January 2024 Pardons Board decision – permits him to leave prison and complete his sentence at home.
Najib arrived at the Palace of Justice on Wednesday morning to hear the Federal Court’s decision on the Attorney General’s Chambers’ (AGC) judicial review over the royal addendum linked to his house arrest bid.
Najib, escorted under tight security by the Prisons Department, reached the court complex at 8.30am. His arrival was met with chants of "Bossku" from a crowd of loyal supporters who had gathered from as early as 6am.
A three-member bench led by Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim, sitting alongside Zabariah and Datuk Hanipah Farikullah delivered the ruling.
Naib was initially sentenced to 12 years in jail and fined RM210 million. His sentence was halved and his fine reduced to RM50 million by the Pardons Board’s earlier this year. He has completed three years of the reduced term, having begun his sentence in August 2022.
The crux of the case is Najib’s insistence that the royal addendum — allegedly issued by the then-King, now the Sultan of Pahang — provides for house arrest. He sought a court order compelling the enforcement of the purported directive.
The High Court, however, rejected Najib’s application in July 2024, ruling that the affidavits he relied on constituted hearsay and failed to meet the legal threshold for leave to proceed.
Najib appealed the ruling and, in January, the Court of Appeal (COA) by a 2–1 majority allowed the matter to return to the High Court for full hearing. The majority found that new material, including a letter said to be from the Pahang Royal Household and produced by Najib’s son, Datuk Nizar Najib, warranted further scrutiny.
“The matter ought to be ventilated,” the COA said, referring to the letter which was submitted at the eleventh hour and is claimed to confirm the existence of the royal addendum.
The minority judge dissented, stating that the fresh evidence did not meet the legal requirements for admissibility in appellate proceedings.
Attorney General Tan Sri Mohd Dusuki Mokhtar appealed against the COA’s decision. Leave was granted by the Federal Court in April for the appeal to proceed.
During the hearing, Dusuki argued that Najib’s legal team had delayed in bringing the document forward and failed to produce it during the High Court proceedings. He added that the alleged addendum lacked both a royal seal and a signature, and while it was addressed to the then-attorney general, Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh, there was no clear evidence of authenticity.
“The applicant must prove his own claims,” the AG stated, adding that the Attorney General’s Chambers was under no obligation to confirm or deny the existence of the disputed document.
Najib’s lawyer, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, countered that Terrirudin — now a Federal Court judge — ought to have ensured the implementation of not only the main pardon order but also the attached addendum, if it existed.
“The respondents failed to act on the royal directive,” said Shafee. “This application is necessary to compel them to do so.”
The court’s forthcoming ruling is expected to set a landmark precedent on the interplay between royal prerogative, the execution of pardon powers, and judicial oversight in Malaysia. - August 13, 2025
.jpg)
