The Court of Appeal’s decision to allow former Prime Minister Najib Razak to submit new evidence has triggered a wave of pressure on Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim. Calls from the opposition for Anwar to resign are intensifying, accusing him and the government of failing to address the issue of the addendum decree revealed by Najib.
However, many, including Pasir Gudang MP Hassan Karim, have dismissed these allegations as unfounded. He emphasized that the judicial decision is a testament to the independence of Malaysia’s judicial institutions and has no direct connection to the Prime Minister’s interference.
Strong Separation of Powers
Hassan described the Court of Appeal’s decision as a significant victory for the country’s democratic system.
“The 2-1 ruling by the panel of judges proves that the executive body, including the Pardons Board, can be reviewed and challenged through judicial processes. This shows that the principle of separation of powers is functioning well in Malaysia,” he said.
Hassan also questioned the logic behind the demand for Anwar to resign, stressing that such an action would only weaken democracy and challenge the stability of the nation’s politics.
“The party that should address this issue is the Attorney General or the Attorney General’s Chambers, not the Prime Minister. Why should the Prime Minister intervene in judicial affairs?” added Hassan.
Opposition Mounts Pressure
The opposition, led by PAS Information Chief Ahmad Fadhli Shaari and Opposition Leader Hamzah Zainudin, continues to attack the government, claiming that the denial of the existence of the addendum decree demonstrates government dishonesty. They also accused Anwar of violating the rights of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and breaching the principles of justice.
Hamzah even described Anwar’s actions as an act of treason against the King and the nation. However, these accusations are seen as a political strategy to weaken the Prime Minister’s position.
Court of Appeal and New Evidence
In a majority decision, the Court of Appeal allowed Najib Razak to submit new evidence after the merits of the case were heard in the High Court. The decision was based on the case Ladd v. Marshall, which sets out the criteria for accepting new evidence.
Judges Firuz Jaffril and Azhahari Kamal Ramli agreed that Najib met the criteria, while Judge Azizah Nawawi disagreed.
Will Anwar Resign?
Despite increasing pressure on Anwar, many political analysts believe that he will not resign. Professor Dr. Mohd Izwan from the University of Malaya stated, “This pressure is part of the opposition’s political maneuvering. There is no solid basis to directly link Anwar with the judicial decision.”
According to government insiders, Anwar’s focus remains on economic reforms and the country’s administration, while this issue is seen as an attempt by the opposition to divert the public’s attention.
Conclusion
The Court of Appeal’s decision in Najib Razak’s case presents a significant test for the political integrity of Malaysia. However, the pressure on Anwar Ibrahim appears more politically motivated than based on realistic demands.
The Prime Minister is expected to continue facing these challenges, with the goal of maintaining political stability and public confidence in his administration. However, the opposition’s calls raise the question of whether Malaysian politics is ready to prioritize the interests of the people over power games.
Stay safe and informed. For more breaking news and updates, visit Ottran GK News today.