The last-minute petition for a pardon by PKR de facto leader Anwar Ibrahim's family may be his last ditch effort for freedom, but the odds will be against him.
The basis of the petition is that Anwar’s incarceration is a result of alleged miscarriage of justice, but according to veteran criminal lawyer Ragunath Kesavan, this is inconsequential because a petition for pardon does not deal with legal arguments.
"All these things about miscarriage of justice or inadmissible evidence no longer matters in at the pardons board.
"It is about compassion. You talk about someone's health or advanced age and so on. You essentially say, 'Okay, I have been convicted. I'm sorry, please pardon me.',” Ragunath ( right ) told Malaysiakini .
"It strongly suggests an admission of guilt."
While there are no readily available statistics on royal pardons granted in Malaysia, he said a pardon is usually sought by those on death row.
"In this case, a successful pardon petition would see the sentence commuted to life imprisonment."
As far as technicalities go, he said, there is no hard or fast rule over who submits the petition on behalf of a convict.
"It could be a lawyer, or the convict's family. In this case, as long as Anwar does not dispute the petition, it stands," said the former Bar Council president.
Political foes on the board
Those who decide on whether to lend Anwar some compassion will then be the key to his freedom. But there are some on the board who are known to be unfriendly to Anwar.
By virtue of Article 42 of the Federal Constitution, members of the Federal Territories pardons board are:
- Yang di-Pertuan Agong Sultan Abdul Halim Muadzam Shah;
- Attorney-General (AG) Abdul Gani Patail;
- Federal Territories Minister Tengku Adnan Mansor; and
- Three individuals who are not elected representatives, appointed by the Agong.
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak and Tengku Adnan Mansor are Anwar's political opponents, being president and secretary-general of Umno.
On July 1, 2008, three days after Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan lodged a police report alleging that Anwar had sodomised him, Anwar lodged his own police report against the AG.
The PKR de facto leader alleged that Gani and then federal police chief Musa Hassan had fabricated evidence against him in the first sodomy case in 1998.
Ragunath said the AG sits on the pardons board to advise on matters related to justice.
Article 42(9) says that the board "shall consider any written opinion which the AG may have delivered" on evidence tendered to the board.
Article 42(8) also states that the Agong presides over the board, implying that he can make the final decision despite the advice of other board members.
However, Ragunath believes that the Agong has no veto powers on the board and that there is no decorum to guide the pardons process.
"The Agong's hands are practically tied. It is not his decision (whether to pardon a convict), but the decision of the board,” he said.
A long wait ahead
At 67, Anwar can ill-afford to spend years waiting for an answer from the pardons board, but, according to Ragunath, he may very well have a long wait ahead.
The pardons board does not meet at regular intervals and cannot be compelled to meet.
This precedent was set in the case of Juraimi Hassan, a co-accused in the high profile Mona Fandey case. Juraimi was Mona's assistant.
Mona Fandey, her husband and Juraimi beheaded Pahang assemblyperson Mazlan Idris in 1993.
In Juraimi's case, the court held that no part of the pardons process can be challenged because it only starts after the legal proceedings.
"There is no time limit. Sometimes the board does not meet at all in a year," he said.
There is also little for convicts seeking a pardon to compare with, as neither the decisions or the petitions are kept on record, he said.
"We hardly hear of what happens to pardons, usually because those pardoned end up being jailed for life," Ragunath said.
