1. FMT - No legal mechanisms for house arrest, says High Court judge
10 months ago
KUALA LUMPUR: House arrests cannot be implemented as there are no legal mechanisms for it, a High Court judge said
Justice Alice Loke said that under Section 43 of the Prisons Act 1995, the discretion to allow a person to serve a sentence under house arrest lies solely with the commissioner-general of prisons.
“The addendum order removes that discretion and is therefore inconsistent with the statutory framework,” she said in her ruling today.
She said the addendum order was not deliberated or decided at the Pardons Board meeting, nor was there any compliance with Article 42 of the constitution.
Loke also said the order was not valid, and that the respondents had neither power nor duty to obey or enforce it.
She also ruled that the applicant’s argument – that the king was not obliged to make decisions during the PB meeting – had no legal basis and was untenable.
2. Malay Mail KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 22 —
High Court judge Alice Loke Yee Ching decided that the former Yang di-Pertuan Agong’s add-on order for house arrest is invalid and cannot be carried out.
This is because the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong did not follow the requirements under the Federal Constitution's Article 42 when he made the add-on or addendum order for house arrest.
“The addendum order was not deliberated nor decided in the Pardons Board meeting. There was no compliance with Article 42, consequently it is not a valid order,” the judge said.
She said this means the Malaysian government has “no power and no duty to obey and enforce” the house arrest order.
She also said this means “no right” to ask for a court order to compel the Malaysian government to enforce the house arrest order.
The judge had then said the then Agong’s house arrest order was not valid as it did not comply with the Federal Constitution’s Article 42
More importantly is the fact that only one decision was made by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong during the meeting, namely the reduction of imprisonment term and fine. There was absolutely no mention of a house arrest,” the judge said based on the minutes.
Based on this written record of the Pardons Board meeting, the judge said “it is indisputable that the house arrest was not deliberated in the Pardons Board meeting”
Since the house arrest issue was not discussed during the Pardons Board meeting, the judge said this means the Pardons Board did not give its advice on whether there should be house arrest:
“To conclude, the contention that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is not bound to decide within the Pardons Board meeting is untenable.
