At a press conference today, Saifuddin revealed that his ministry only received two documents regarding Najib’s case – the minutes of the Federal Territories Pardons Board meeting and the official pardons board order reducing his prison sentence and fine.
Neither of these, he said, mentioned “house arrest”.
“We are not hiding anything. The documents we received did not include any mention of house arrest.
“How are we supposed to implement something that is not in the official order?” he said.
He was responding to claims by Najib’s lawyer, Shafee Abdullah, who alleged that home ministry had failed to enforce a house arrest.
Saifuddin said the pardons board meeting, chaired by the previous Yang di-Pertuan Agong, took place on Jan 29, 2024, and the home ministry received the documents from the legal affairs division of the Prime Minister’s Department on Feb 2.
He said the minutes of the pardons board meeting are classified as confidential.
He also revealed that the official pardons board order was signed by the former king, witnessed by federal territories minister Dr Zaliha Mustafa.
According to the order, he said, Najib’s prison sentence was reduced, with an early release date set for Aug 23, 2028.
The order also reduced Najib’s fine to RM50 million but stipulated that if the fine is not paid, his prison term would be extended by one year, pushing the release date to Aug 23, 2029.
“There was no mention of house arrest in the order signed by the (previous) king. The prisons department is bound to implement the written order strictly, and we cannot go beyond what was stated,” he said.
Asked if the Pahang palace had communicated with the ministry on the matter, Saifuddin replied: “No communication.”
Earlier today, Najib obtained leave to begin judicial review proceedings to compel the government to execute a supplementary decree issued by the former king allowing him to serve the remainder of his jail term under house arrest.
In his ruling, Court of Appeal judge Firuz Jaffril noted that Najib had written to six of the seven respondents named in the appeal seeking to confirm the existence of the purported addendum but received no reply from any of them.
The six respondents were the home minister, the prisons department commissioner-general, the attorney-general, the Federal Territories Pardons Board, the law and institutional reform minister, and the director-general of the Prime Minister’s Department’s legal affairs division.