When life seems hard, the courageous do not lie down and accept defeat; instead, they are all the more determined to struggle for a better future.
– Queen Elizabeth II
I believe I am among the minority who are for the death penalty to stay. But I have also opted for introducing the non-mandatory capital punishment.
When the debate on the death penalty cropped up several times in the past decade or so, I had stayed the course and insisted that capital punishment was necessary but the final decision should be left to the judge. For me, the mandatory death penalty, not capital punishment itself, should go.
Let me recap what I had written years ago, in 2012 to be exact.
“I’m not sorry for sounding cruel and being out of place by asking that the death penalty stays. It’s not that some people deserve to die, it’s just that some people do not deserve to live.
“For example, former Iraqi president Saddam Hussein was hanged after being found guilty and convicted of crimes against humanity by a special tribunal. Most would have watched the video of his execution and I’m sure not many of us, or none at all, shed a tear for him.
“Back home, when Botak Chin or Mona Fandey were hanged, I believe we felt nothing except relief.
“Many of you are keen to see the end of capital punishment. But I would advocate an additional crime for the death penalty.
“Political leaders who are excessively corrupt and have stolen from the state and people, causing misery and suffering to others in the process, should also be sent to the gallows.”
I believe I have made my point. As always, we can agree to disagree as most of us consider that a healthy discourse.
Here we are today. It seems that the whole nation is involved in a heated debate over the partial royal pardon granted to former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
The Pardons Board announced last Friday that Najib’s 12-year prison sentence has been halved to six years and his fine reduced from RM210 million to RM50 million.
Judging from the many news reports and articles, particularly in the English media, it is obvious that many were disappointed, even angry, at the decision of the Pardons Board.
Not a day passes, since the announcement, had we not read of comments and opinions on the subject. Most were not in favour of the pardon, and understandably so.
While several politicians and civil society movements have voiced displeasure at seeing Najib’s punishment being reduced, some others especially from Umno were also dissatisfied as they believe Najib should have been given a full pardon.
Najib himself had also expressed his disappointment over the board’s decision, which was reached when it was being chaired by the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah.
In an Instagram post last Saturday, his daughter Nooryana Najwa said Najib was disappointed that he was not granted a full pardon and only had his prison sentence halved and fine reduced.
If we look at it from the justice and fairness angle, supporters of the pardon may argue that the individual has served his/her time and demonstrated remorse or rehabilitation.
Opponents may emphasise the importance of maintaining justice and fairness, suggesting that pardoning the felon could undermine the legal system and the principle of equal treatment under the law.
Whichever side we are on, it is also important to understand that a remission of sentence does not mean acquittal.
In Najib’s case, the official statement of the Pardons Board of the Federal Territories of Kuala Lumpur, Labuan and Putrajaya says that Najib’s sentence is “reduced” from 12 years of imprisonment to six and from RM210 million of fine to RM50 million.
It’s a remission of his sentence. The guilt of Najib is not affected. It does not mean acquittal. This means that the Pardons Board also adjudged the former PM guilty of the crime he was charged with.
That, Najib has to carry with him for the rest of his life, even if he continues to insist that he is innocent.
To the family, friends and supporters of Najib, that is punishment enough!
Finally, I take note of a 2022 statement from the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong who stated that “the power to punish and pardon should not be used arbitrarily because it will be held accountable in the “afterlife”.
We can believe that Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah knew what he was doing when he signed on the pardon for Najib in one of his last acts as the king.
The views expressed here are those of the columnist and do not necessarily represent the views of New Sarawak Tribune.
