Individuals sentenced to more than 10 years in prison will not be eligible for house arrest under the proposed new law, says Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution Ismail.
In his winding-up speech on Budget 2025 in the Dewan Rakyat on Thursday (Nov 7), the Home Minister explained that the House Arrest Bill, introduced by his ministry, aims to address issues related to remand detainees, not convicted individuals.
In response to a question from Kota Bharu MP Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan on whether an alleged addendum on house arrest linked to former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s partial pardon existed, Saifuddin clarified that the courts had ruled the addendum as hearsay.
Read more at https://tinyurl.com/53x8an3p
WATCH MORE: https://thestartv.com/c/news
SUBSCRIBE: https://cutt.ly/TheStar
LIKE: https://fb.com/TheStarOnline
In his winding-up speech on Budget 2025 in the Dewan Rakyat on Thursday (Nov 7), the Home Minister explained that the House Arrest Bill, introduced by his ministry, aims to address issues related to remand detainees, not convicted individuals.
In response to a question from Kota Bharu MP Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan on whether an alleged addendum on house arrest linked to former premier Datuk Seri Najib Razak’s partial pardon existed, Saifuddin clarified that the courts had ruled the addendum as hearsay.
Read more at https://tinyurl.com/53x8an3p
WATCH MORE: https://thestartv.com/c/news
SUBSCRIBE: https://cutt.ly/TheStar
LIKE: https://fb.com/TheStarOnline
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00I understand the issue of prison congestion.
00:04In fact, when I became the Minister last year,
00:10as far as I remember, the number of prison overcrowding was around 72,000-74,000.
00:18Now, according to the statistics, the Minister said it was around 87,000.
00:27So, the number has increased.
00:30But we also need to understand that there are certain cases or offences
00:40that should not be given house arrest.
00:45As far as I understand, cases like Riman, cases of minor offences,
00:52those should be given house detention
00:58because it can reduce the prison congestion.
01:02So, the Minister said that he gave several examples
01:10where house arrest will not be allowed.
01:14For example, 6A, 6, and so on.
01:17And also for offences that can be sentenced to 10 years in prison and above.
01:24Is 10 years in prison and above according to the offence
01:28or according to the sentence given by the court?
01:31That is important.
01:32Because if someone is accused under a certain section,
01:38the sentence is prescribed in that section.
01:42So, should we follow the prescribed sentence or the sentence given by the court?
01:49So, we want to know, for example, in the case of Najib Tun Razak.
01:57In that case, he was also detained and given a certain sentence.
02:03So, will house arrest be used or can be used by someone like that?
02:11Mr. President.
02:12Mr. President, I will continue.
02:15The question is almost the same.
02:17If you, Mr. Minister, say that the rational or justification for the provision of house arrest
02:24is because our prison is overcrowded
02:28or because there is no provision for the use of devices,
02:33I think that is not a big reason for the provision of a law.
02:39If you still remember, when you were in the Covid period,
02:45some provisions have been changed to include the use of devices in the provisions.
02:51For example, Provision 342, the Provision for the Control of Infectious Diseases.
02:56Those who are known for not taking steps, not using face masks and so on,
03:03are provided with the provision to use devices.
03:06That is a small thing.
03:08The provision in Section 3 is already clear.
03:11I think the intention of the legislature
03:16at this time has also taken into account the fact that
03:20it will be overcrowded in the prison.
03:23So, it can't be just because of those reasons
03:26that there is a need for a special provision for house arrest.
03:30And I also want to ask, as Bukit Gelugur,
03:34is this issue raised in the community,
03:41an addendum issue,
03:43which was said during the pardon process
03:46which was heard by the former Prime Minister, Najib Razak,
03:51on February 2, 2024.
03:54Today, I want to confirm the facts.
03:57Yesterday, I was with the Minister of Law.
04:00I doubted that he didn't want to answer my question
04:03and he said, this is a matter for the KDN Minister to answer,
04:07this addendum issue.
04:09While he told in the court yesterday,
04:12he said, who is in charge?
04:14As if he didn't know who is in charge.
04:16In my hand is clearly the statement of the media,
04:19part of the laws of the Prime Minister's Office
04:22as in charge of the Pardon Institute.
04:25He didn't know he was in charge of the Pardon Institute.
04:30So yesterday, I wasn't here.
04:31I came back and brought it to you today.
04:33It's okay.
04:34So in this matter, I want to get an explanation straight away,
04:37because this is related.
04:39Is it true, Mr. President,
04:41that there is what is called an addendum,
04:45an additional order,
04:48in the order related to
04:51the decision of the Pardon Institute
04:54against Datuk Seri Najib Tur Razak,
04:57which the Pardon Institute
05:02has given initial liberation to him
05:07and also reduced the fine from Rp210 million
05:11to only Rp50 million.
05:13And it is said there is an addendum.
05:16I have been assigned by...
05:18I will respond to the addendum issue straight away
05:20so as not to prolong the time.
05:22The issue is the addendum issue.
05:24I will explain.
05:26Thank you, Mr. Terbaru.
05:28Mr. Terbaru has taken 7 minutes of my time.
05:30Mr. Terbaru alone.
05:31I have 45 minutes.
05:33Okay.
05:34Okay, Mr. Terbaru.
05:35I want to say this.
05:36I explained earlier.
05:38Okay.
05:39The KDN's desire to implement this act
05:43is to address the issue of remand detention.
05:47If it's a detention, it's not right.
05:49It doesn't include us.
05:51Okay.
05:52Other than that,
05:53when we go to court later,
05:54Mr. Aliam Bohmak will feel that
05:55detention must also be considered.
05:58Then we will make a decision.
05:59For now,
06:01our intention is for a category
06:04where the court rules on remand detention
06:07while waiting for the date of the hearing.
06:09So,
06:10including if he is accused of remand
06:12under the 10-year sentence earlier,
06:14if it's 10 years, he is not qualified to be considered.
06:17That shows the serious level of his crime.
06:20Okay.
06:21Mr. Terbaru,
06:22the story about the addendum
06:24is related to the decision of the Pardon Board.
06:29Okay.
06:30The Pardon Board is a full-fledged institution.
06:32The power is in the hands of Mr. Agong.
06:34Administrative, of course.
06:35He is the Secretary of Investigation, etc.
06:38Mr. Terbaru, don't follow the court's decision
06:41when the accused is brought to court
06:44and the court then considers that
06:46this addendum is a hearsay.
06:50The court's decision is already clear.
06:53So, if it's already there,
06:55it's already clear.
06:56We shouldn't go any further.
06:58KDN is even further.
06:59We don't follow the Pardon Board.
07:01Not at all.
07:02Not at all.
07:03So,
07:04whether it exists or not,
07:05the court said
07:06when the matter was brought up
07:08by the accused,
07:10the court said
07:11this story was obtained from a summary.
07:13The summary was heard from a summary.
07:14The summary was obtained from a summary.
07:16That means it's a hearsay.
07:18So, it's already there.
07:19I don't want to go any further.
07:21Alright.
07:22I want to continue with the second point, Mr. Terbaru.
07:24Give me a minute.
07:25I have 23 minutes.
07:26I don't want to go any further.
07:27Half a minute.
07:28Half a minute.
07:29I've made it clear, Mr. Terbaru.
07:30Half a minute.
07:31The court's decision
07:32that it has already made.
07:33I want to ask you this, Mr. Muhammad.
07:35Be fair to me also.
07:36Yes.
07:37As a government,
07:38when there is an issue of this addendum,
07:42can the government clarify
07:44whether or not there is an addendum?
07:46It's not a matter of hearsay or not.
07:48The Prime Minister or the Minister
07:50can address the former Deputy Prime Minister.
07:52Ask the former Deputy Prime Minister
07:54whether or not there is an addendum.
07:55That's...
07:56Please sit down.
07:57Let me answer.
07:58That's a respectful view.
07:59Isn't it?
08:00Our view,
08:01if there is a dispute,
08:02a dispute
08:03between the government and the people,
08:05between the Polish citizens,
08:06which institution will make the decision?
08:08The court's institution will make the decision.
08:10If the court says it's a hearsay,
08:12the respected one will understand
08:14what hearsay means.
08:16Yes.
08:17So, it's considered a hearsay.
08:18The respected view is
08:19that the government should ask.
08:21That's a respected view.
08:22Hearsay is a hearsay.
08:23The issue is not a hearsay.
08:24The respected view is
08:25that the government should ask.
08:27That's a respected view.
08:29If there is a dispute,
08:30a dispute,
08:31leave it to the court to decide.
08:33If there is something
08:34related to the law,
08:35let the court develop the law
08:37with permission.
08:39I was so excited when I read the script
08:41that I wanted to blow the wind.
08:42I spoke in English too.
08:45I was so excited when I read the script
08:46that I wanted to blow the wind.
08:47I spoke in English too.
08:48I spoke in English too.
08:49I spoke in English too.
08:50I spoke in English too.
08:51I spoke in English too.
08:52I spoke in English too.
08:53I spoke in English too.
08:54I spoke in English too.
08:55I spoke in English too.
08:56I spoke in English too.
08:57I spoke in English too.
08:58I spoke in English too.
08:59I spoke in English too.
09:00I spoke in English too.
09:01I spoke in English too.
09:02I spoke in English too.
09:03I spoke in English too.
09:04I spoke in English too.
09:05I spoke in English too.
09:06I spoke in English too.
09:07I spoke in English too.
09:08I spoke in English too.
09:09I spoke in English too.
09:10I spoke in English too.
09:11I spoke in English too.