DATUK Seri Najib Tun Razak’s legal team has not ruled out the possibility of calling Federal Court judge Tan Sri Ahmad Terrirudin Mohd Salleh as a key witness in the ongoing judicial review proceedings concerning the alleged Royal Addendum to his partial royal pardon.
Najib’s lead counsel, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, said the defence may summon any witness necessary to establish the facts of the case, either via affidavit or in-person testimony.
“We can also subpoena several witnesses as required, whether through affidavit or physical appearance,” he said. “In this case concerning the Royal Addendum, for example, we may call Ahmad Terrirudin himself to determine whether he received it (when he was serving as Attorney General).”
He added that the defence is entitled to summon officials from the Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) to help clarify key factual points.
“It is essential that all relevant facts are brought before the court during the hearing and judicial review process,” he said. “We must undertake the presentation of facts diligently during the judicial examination.”
On Wednesday, the Federal Court ruled that the question of whether the Royal Addendum exists and whether it is valid must be determined through a full hearing at the High Court.
Delivering the written judgment, Federal Court judge Datuk Zabariah Mohd Yusof said the issue should be addressed substantively during the judicial review proceedings.
“At this point, the Royal Addendum exists, and its validity or authenticity must be established through trial,” she said. “We do not believe it is appropriate for the court to express any view on the matter at this stage.”
She sat alongside Chief Judge of Malaya Tan Sri Hasnah Mohammed Hashim and Federal Court judge Datuk Hanipah Farikullah.
Zabariah added that a thorough investigation, with full hearings and evidence, was required to determine the matter.
Significantly, she noted, the Attorney General had admitted during submissions that the Royal Addendum did in fact exist.
“That admission has substantial implications for the issues before the panel, particularly regarding the existence of new evidence,” she said.
However, she clarified that this ruling does not imply the Royal Addendum forms part of the Pardons Board’s order.
“Although the addendum exists, it cannot automatically be admitted as evidence. The respondent must meet the required criteria and procedures to introduce it as fresh evidence,” she said. “Its existence does not make it valid without a decision through a substantive hearing.”
The panel accordingly referred the case back to the High Court for a full judicial review to be heard before a different judge.
The Federal Court also allowed the Royal Addendum to be submitted as fresh evidence under Rule 7 of the Court of Appeal Rules 1994. Najib, the former Pekan MP, has also been granted leave to file a judicial review at the High Court.
Earlier that morning, the Attorney General’s appeal to block Najib’s judicial review was dismissed, clearing the way for the case to proceed in the High Court in Kuala Lumpur according to the scheduled hearing dates. - August 13, 2025
.jpg)
.jpeg)
