Source: Attorney General’s Chambers media statement
PUTRAJAYA, November 7, 2026 — The Attorney General’s Chambers (AGC) said it is not disputing, setting aside or seeking to suspend the conditional pardon granted to Datuk Seri Najib Razak, and that questions over the legal effect of a High Court discharge order should be referred immediately to the court.
In a five-page media statement dated November 7, 2026, the AGC responded to a November 6 statement by Messrs Shafee & Co., Najib’s lawyers, on the implementation of the Conditional Pardon Order dated September 18, 2026 and the temporary deferment of his house arrest.
The AGC said it viewed seriously allegations in the lawyers’ statement that the Attorney General had acted beyond his jurisdiction, defied the decree of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, set aside a court order and caused Najib’s unlawful detention, saying these needed to be clarified so the public would not get a wrong picture of the legal position.
It said it upholds the rule of law, respects the institution of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and recognises His Majesty’s prerogative of pardon under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution.
Question over discharge order
According to the statement, the question raised by the AGC is not about the validity or authority of the pardon, but about the legal effect of the Order of Discharge issued by the Kuala Lumpur High Court on November 6, 2026 on the remaining prison sentence in the SRC International case, and its implications for when the prison sentence in the 1MDB case begins.
The AGC said the issue arose after the RM50 million fine was paid on November 6 and the High Court issued an Order of Discharge on Payment of Fine on the same date. It quoted the order as stating: “And whereas the said fine amounting to RM 50,000,000 has now been paid into this Court: This is to authorise you to discharge the said Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Hj Abd Razak […] forthwith.”
The AGC said the same order also states that Najib shall serve the remainder of his sentence under house arrest until August 23, 2028 under the pardon order. It said a legal question therefore arises over whether the discharge relates only to the fine, allowing the remaining SRC International prison sentence to continue through house arrest, or whether it means the SRC International sentence has been completed.
The AGC said this is directly linked to the High Court’s sentencing order in the 1MDB case, under which that prison sentence begins after the SRC International sentence is completed. It added that an application to stay execution of the 1MDB sentence was rejected by the High Court on October 14, 2026.
The two possibilities have different legal implications and should not be decided on assumption or one-sided interpretation, the statement said.
Rejects ‘treason’ portrayal
The AGC rejected the portrayal that seeking legal clarification was an attempt to take over His Majesty’s power of pardon, saying the power of pardon and the court’s power to interpret the legal effect of an order are two different matters. It said the proper channel to resolve the question is the court with jurisdiction.
It also said that any allegation or insinuation that the Attorney General or certain parties had directed prison authorities to act unlawfully should not be presented as a conclusion without a clear factual basis.
The AGC said it viewed seriously expressions describing the Attorney General’s actions as an insult or treason against the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, calling such allegations baseless.
It said an immediate court determination was also needed to protect Najib’s own rights. If the court decides the SRC International sentence has been completed, continued detention on the basis of that sentence could mean he is held beyond the period he should serve, the AGC said; if the sentence is still in force, it must be carried out in line with the pardon order and any related court orders.
The AGC said referring the matter to the court was not aimed at delaying or thwarting the pardon, but at avoiding conflict between orders in force and ensuring no sentence is carried out unlawfully. It added that it does not intend to respond to allegations through the media on matters that should be decided through the judicial process.
The statement comes after Istana Negara said earlier on November 7 that the conditional pardon order was clear and that disputing it tends towards defying the order of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, as reported by LNA.
Source: Attorney General’s Chambers media statement, November 7, 2026, published on the AGC website
About The Author
