What constitutional powers do Malaysian monarchs hold regarding sentences?

Question

Accepted Answer

Constitutional Powers of Malaysian Monarchs Regarding Sentences

Malaysian monarchs, specifically the Yang di-Pertuan Agong for Federal Territories and the Ruler of a State for their respective states, possess constitutional authority under Article 42 of the Federal Constitution to grant pardons, reprieves, and respites for offences. These powers operate independently of, yet are without prejudice to, federal laws that provide for the remission of sentences for good conduct or special services, and any other powers to remit, suspend, or commute sentences conferred by federal or state legislation.
Power to Grant Pardons, Reprieves, and Respites

Article 42 of the Federal Constitution explicitly grants monarchs the power to bestow pardons, reprieves, and respites. A pardon is an act of grace that exempts an individual from punishment and effectively blots out their guilt for a committed crime. A reprieve, on the other hand, signifies a temporary suspension in the execution of a criminal sentence, often granted in specific circumstances such as for a pregnant offender. A respite involves awarding a lesser sentence than prescribed, typically when the accused has no prior convictions.
Statutory Powers for Sentence Modification

Beyond constitutional provisions, federal laws such as the Criminal Procedure Code empower monarchs to further modify sentences. Section 300 of this code allows for the suspension or remission of the whole or any part of a punishment. Additionally, Section 301 provides the authority to commute sentences, which involves replacing a more severe punishment with a less severe one, such as converting a death sentence to life imprisonment.
Distinction Between Remission and Pardon

It is crucial to distinguish between a remission and a pardon. Remission, as provided for under federal laws, refers to a reduction in the length of a sentence without altering the nature of the offence or the guilt of the offender. This means the individual still bears the guilt but serves a shorter period of incarceration. In contrast, a pardon serves to entirely exempt an individual from punishment and absolve their guilt.
Application in the Case of Najib Razak

The distinction between these powers was highlighted in the case of former prime minister Najib Razak. The official statement from the Pardons Board indicated a reduction in his sentence from 12 years' imprisonment to six years and a fine reduction from RM210 million to RM50 million. This modification was officially described as a remission of his sentence, clarifying that his guilt was not affected and it did not amount to an acquittal.

Reading history

Hide →

This history is cleared when the page is closed.

What constitutional powers do Malaysian monarchs hold regarding sentences?

Loading

Was this article helpful?

Helpful

Not helpful

Report an issue

1

0

0

Share with friends