Najib To Learn This Week Whether He Will Remain In Prison Or Be Allowed House Arrest

Follow us on Instagram, TikTok, and WhatsApp for the latest stories and breaking news.

UPDATE:

Najib To Remain Behind Bars After High Court Dismisses His House Arrest Bid

Two High Court rulings, one involving the SRC International case and another tied to the 1MDB trial, could determine whether Datuk Seri Najib Razak stays behind bars or serves the remainder of his sentence at home

The former prime minister will learn his fate as two High Court judges prepare to deliver decisions in separate cases with major implications for his liberty, reported FMT.

According to FMT, High Court judge Justice Alice Loke is set to rule in Kuala Lumpur today, 22 December, on Najib's application to serve the remainder of his six-year jail sentence at home. The application relates to his 2022 conviction for misappropriating RM42 million from SRC International.

Najib has been serving his sentence since August 2022, and his original 12-year jail term was later halved by the Federal Territories Pardons Board.

Meanwhile, on Friday, 26 December, in Putrajaya, Justice Collin Lawrence Sequerah, now elevated to the Federal Court, is scheduled to deliver his verdict in Najib's 1MDB corruption trial, involving four charges of abuse of power and 21 charges of money laundering totalling RM2.28 billion.

#NSTTV Najib arrives at court ahead of house arrest decision pic.twitter.com/xoc7s5uNos

— New Straits Times (@NST_Online) December 22, 2025

FMT reported that Loke's decision will hinge on whether the court recognises the existence and legal effect of a purported royal addendum to the pardons board order

If the addendum is recognised, Najib could be allowed to serve the remainder of his sentence at home. However, lawyer Kitson Foong told FMT that Najib may still remain incarcerated if the government applies for a stay pending an appeal.

"I believe the government will then apply for a stay of the ruling pending its appeal. If (the stay is) allowed, based on special circumstances, Najib will remain incarcerated," Foong was quoted as saying.

Both the defence and prosecution are expected to appeal any decision, which would take the matter to the Federal Court for final determination.

The government has previously argued that while the addendum exists, its legality is questionable as it allegedly failed to comply with Article 42 of the Federal Constitution, which governs the exercise of royal pardons

FMT reported that minutes from the Federal Territories Pardons Board meeting on 29 January 2024 showed that the addendum was not discussed. Instead, board members advised the then Yang di-Pertuan Agong, Al-Sultan Abdullah Sultan Ahmad Shah, to halve Najib's jail term and reduce his fine from RM210 million to RM50 million.

Najib's lead counsel, Tan Sri Shafee Abdullah, has maintained that the king's decision must be respected regardless of whether the addendum was formally issued during the meeting.

Najib's fate will also depend on Friday's outcome of the 1MDB trial

Lawyer A Srimurugan told FMT that if Najib's SRC judicial review application is dismissed and he is convicted in the 1MDB case, he will remain in prison, adding that another hefty fine is likely if a conviction is secured.

However, Srimurugan said that if the SRC application is allowed and Najib is acquitted of all 1MDB charges, he would be able to serve his remaining sentence under house arrest.

Najib faces allegations that RM2.28 billion was deposited into his AmBank accounts between February 2011 and December 2014. He has denied wrongdoing, insisting the funds were donations from the Saudi royal family and accusing fugitive financier Low Taek Jho, or Jho Low, of masterminding the scheme without his knowledge.

The prosecution maintains that it has proven its case beyond a reasonable doubt, while Najib's defence amounts to a mere denial.

Najib was also jointly charged with former Treasury secretary-general Irwan Serigar Abdullah over the alleged misappropriation of RM6.6 billion meant for payments to International Petroleum Investment Company (IPIC).

Both were later granted a discharge not amounting to an acquittal (DNAA).