Najib’s Conditional Pardon and House Arrest: What It Does and Does Not Do

On 18 September 2026 the Federal Territories Pardons Board held its 64th meeting, chaired by His Majesty Sultan Ibrahim, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. The Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister’s Department then announced that His Majesty had consented to grant Datuk Seri Najib Razak a conditional pardon. Under it, the balance of Najib’s sentence in the SRC International case may be served under house arrest until 23 August 2028, on condition that a RM50 million fine is paid.

From twelve years to six, and now house arrest

On 28 July 2020 the High Court convicted Najib on seven charges concerning RM42 million of SRC International funds and imposed 12 years’ imprisonment and a RM210 million fine. The conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeal and, on 23 August 2022, by the Federal Court; Najib began serving his sentence at Kajang Prison that day.

After the Board’s 61st meeting on 29 January 2024, it was announced on 2 February 2024 that the prison term had been halved to six years and the fine reduced to RM50 million, with release projected for 23 August 2028 if the fine was paid and 23 August 2029 if not. Najib’s later attempt to enforce a royal “addendum order” said to permit house arrest was dismissed by the High Court on 22 December 2025, and his appeal was withdrawn in April 2026. The Board’s 63rd meeting on 11 September 2026 deferred his pardon application; the 64th decided it a week later.

What the conditional pardon does

The pardon power comes from Article 42 of the Federal Constitution. Article 42(1) empowers the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to grant pardons, reprieves and respites for offences committed in the Federal Territories, and under Article 42(4)(b) the power is exercised on the advice of a Pardons Board, at whose meetings the Yang di-Pertuan Agong presides (Article 42(8)).

As reported, the decision changes how the balance of the six-year SRC sentence is served: under house arrest rather than in prison. The statement stressed that the pardon is subject to payment of the RM50 million fine and that Najib must comply with all the conditions set; on any breach the pardon is revoked automatically and he returns to prison.

What it does not do

It is not an acquittal. A pardon of this kind varies the sentence. The conviction, affirmed on every appeal, stands.

It is not release, and it is not unconditional. House arrest is a way of serving the sentence, not the end of it, and a conditional pardon can be revoked.

It has not been reported as implemented. Press reports on 19 September 2026 indicated that the fine had not yet been paid. The Attorney General was reported as saying it must first be paid at the Kuala Lumpur High Court Registry, after which the Prisons Department would issue a standard operating procedure.

Its detailed conditions are not public. No particular arrangement, whether about residence, visitors or the monitoring of compliance, should be assumed to form part of the pardon until the authorities confirm it.

It does not touch the 1MDB case. The pardon concerns only the SRC sentence. On 26 December 2025 the High Court sentenced Najib to 15 years’ imprisonment in the separate 1MDB-Tanore case, to begin after the SRC sentence ends. That conviction is under appeal, and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission has said that the position in the 1MDB case has not changed.

How house arrest is carried out: a debated mechanism

In dismissing the addendum case in December 2025, the High Court held first that the addendum had never been deliberated or decided at a Pardons Board meeting. It also held that a house-arrest order could not be executed because Malaysian law provided no mechanism for it, and that release on licence under section 43 of the Prisons Act 1995 was not such a mechanism. The September 2026 decision, by contrast, was taken at a Board meeting and officially announced. Whether that second ground has any bearing on a pardon granted through the Board is an open question.

One view, put forward by some lawyers in the press, is that house arrest is imprisonment served elsewhere, which the Prisons Act 1995 can accommodate: sections 2 and 3 are said to allow the Minister to declare a house or building a prison, so that visitors would need the Prisons Department’s approval. Another view is that Malaysian law does not yet provide for house arrest, that any authority for it rests on Article 42 rather than the Prisons Act, and that statute does not yet spell out how compliance would be monitored. Some lawyers have also raised equality-before-the-law concerns. None of this has been tested in court, and we express no view.

The Prisons (Amendment) Bill 2026, first read on 24 June 2026, would empower the Commissioner General of Prisons to order electronic monitoring devices for prisoners in custody, on licence or on parole. The second-reading debate the next day was deferred and the Bill was referred to parliamentary special select committees. On the latest report available to us (27 July 2026), it had not been passed.

Practical takeaways

• A pardon alters a sentence. It is not a finding of innocence, and the conviction stands.

• Conditional means revocable: a breach brings automatic revocation and a return to prison.

• Payment of the RM50 million fine is a stated condition. As at 19 September 2026 it was reported as unpaid.

• The specific conditions are unpublished. Treat online claims with caution until officially confirmed.

• The pardon covers one case only. The 1MDB-Tanore conviction and sentence are separate and under appeal.

What remains pending as at 19 September 2026

Payment of the fine and the Prisons Department’s procedure were still awaited. The Malaysian Bar’s appeal concerning the February 2024 sentence reduction (judgment reserved by the Court of Appeal on 31 July 2026) and Najib’s 1MDB-Tanore appeal are both pending. We express no view on their merits.

Authorities and sources

• Federal Constitution, Article 42(1), (4)(b) and (8).

• Prisons Act 1995, sections 2, 3 and 43 (the provisions commentators have pointed to); Prisons (Amendment) Bill 2026.

• Kuala Lumpur High Court, addendum order decision of 22 December 2025 (grounds published by The Edge; Malay Mail, 22 and 23 December 2025).

• Malay Mail, The Star and Malaysiakini on the 18 September 2026 pardon; Media Selangor/Bernama, The Star and Malay Mail (opinion), 19 September 2026.

• Bernama, SRC case chronology; Bernama and Malay Mail on the 2 February 2024 announcement; Malay Mail and The Star, 27 April 2026; Malay Mail, 11 September 2026.

• The Edge and RTM reports on the Bill; The Star, 27 July 2026.

This article is general legal information only and is current as at 19 September 2026. It is not legal advice and does not create a solicitor-client relationship. Court decisions may be appealed and the law may change; please seek advice on your own circumstances. — Chris & Partners, Advocates & Solicitors