How does Anwar claim the Pardons Board decision was invalid?

Question

Accepted Answer

Anwar Claims Pardons Board Decision Was Invalid Due to Procedural and Justice Rule Violations

Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim asserts that the Pardons Board's decision to reject his clemency petition was invalid because it contravened fundamental principles of justice. He further contends that the decision was never formally communicated to him or his family in writing, and that the process was flawed due to the involvement of the Attorney-General at the time, whom he accused of having a personal animosity towards him. These claims form the basis of his application for judicial review.
Decision Contravention of Justice Rules

Anwar's affidavit supporting his application explicitly states that the Pardons Board's decision was reached in contravention of the basic rules of justice. This alleged violation of fundamental legal principles is presented as a primary reason for deeming the decision invalid.
Lack of Written Communication

A key point of contention raised by Anwar is that the Pardons Board's decision was never officially communicated to him or his family in writing. This absence of formal written notification is presented as further evidence of procedural irregularities in the handling of his clemency petition.
Alleged Bias of Attorney-General

Furthermore, Anwar claims the decision was flawed due to the involvement of the Attorney-General at that time. He alleges that the Attorney-General was an interested party and harboured a prolonged hatred towards him, thereby compromising the impartiality of the board's decision-making process.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

How does Anwar claim the Pardons Board decision was invalid?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends