KUALA LUMPUR: For former Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Wednesday’s court decision was undoubtedly another painful setback.

But it was not the end.

After the High Court rejected his application to stay the execution of the 15-year sentence and RM11.4 billion fine in the 1MDB case, his lead counsel Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah emerged from court visibly disappointed — describing the decision as one that had left the defence “very disappointed” and, indeed, “shocked”.

Yet beneath the disappointment was something else: determination.

Because for Najib and his legal team, the question now is not simply what happened in the High Court.

It is what happens next.

Shafee confirmed that the defence will file a fresh application for a stay of execution at the Court of Appeal after obtaining the full grounds of the High Court’s decision.

And that distinction matters.

Najib’s substantive appeal against the conviction and sentence imposed by Sequerah has already been filed at the Court of Appeal. He lodged his notice of appeal on 29 December 2025, shortly after being sentenced on 26 December. What the defence is now seeking is a stay of execution pending that appeal.

It Was A Stay, Not The End Of The Appeal

Najib was not asking the High Court to overturn the 1MDB conviction or the sentence imposed by Sequerah.

He was asking for the execution of that sentence to be stayed while the legal challenge continues.

That distinction matters.

A stay would not have erased the conviction or overturned the sentence. It would simply have paused its execution while Najib pursued his appeal.

The High Court, however, found that Najib had failed to satisfy the special-circumstances test required to justify a stay.

Justice Noor Ruwena Md Nurdin gave significant weight to the gravity of the offences and public-interest considerations, and also rejected the defence’s arguments based on Najib’s medical condition.

That was where the defence fundamentally disagreed with the court.

Shafee argued that public interest should be viewed differently when the issue before the court was whether execution should be stayed.

“Public interest is when you consider how to punish it, not when it is a question of stay,” he said.

That argument will now be taken to the Court of Appeal.

Why The Defence Is So Disappointed

There was another point that clearly troubled Shafee.

He questioned the treatment of Najib as a repeat offender, pointing out that the prosecution itself had submitted that Najib was not a repeat offender.

Yet the judge did not accept that position.

Shafee argued that the offences in the SRC and 1MDB cases occurred during broadly the same period and questioned why Najib should be treated as a repeat offender in the circumstances.

For the defence, these are not minor technicalities.

They go to the reasoning behind the decision to refuse the stay.

And there is another important part of the story that may easily be overlooked.

The defence had deliberately chosen not to seek a stay immediately after Sequerah delivered the 1MDB judgment in December 2025.

According to Shafee’s submissions, Najib was then already serving his SRC sentence, and the defence wanted to preserve the possibility that the two sentences could run concurrently if the appellate court ultimately ruled in Najib’s favour on that issue.

The decision not to seek a stay at that time, Shafee argued, was expressly premised on Najib retaining the right to apply for a stay later, depending on subsequent developments.

The situation changed after the conditional pardon and the prospect of house arrest.

The 1MDB sentence, which is due to begin after Najib completes his existing SRC sentence, suddenly became much more immediate in practical terms.

That is why the defence is fighting for a stay now.

Stay First

Shafee was clear that the main appeal could take years.

And that, from the defence’s perspective, is precisely why a stay matters.

“We are going to the Court of Appeal to file a similar application,” he said.

The substantive appeal is already there.

The new battle is over whether the 1MDB sentence should be put on hold while that appeal is being heard.

For now, Shafee’s strategy can perhaps be summed up in two words:

“Stay first.”

And Then There Is Home

While one door has closed for Najib, another appears to be opening.

And this is perhaps the most human part of Wednesday’s developments.

Shafee confirmed that Najib has now received the official order relating to his house arrest, together with an attachment setting out its terms and conditions.

But the details cannot be disclosed.

According to Shafee, Najib has been instructed by the Prisons Department not to reveal the contents because the information is intended for his own use and disclosure could lead to public speculation.

One important detail, however, has been confirmed.

The house-arrest location is Najib’s own home at Langgak Duta, where he will be able to stay with his family.

The arrangement relates to the remainder of his existing SRC sentence, which was reduced to six years under the earlier pardon and is due to run until 23 August 2028.

The conditional pardon granted in September allows him to serve that remainder under house arrest, subject to the RM50 million payment condition.

But the High Court’s rejection of the 1MDB stay does not, in itself, cancel the separate house-arrest arrangement.

Shafee confirmed that the two matters remain distinct.

Two Legal Battles, Two Very Different Paths

This is where the story becomes more complicated than the headline of a rejected stay application might suggest.

There are now two separate legal tracks.

The first is the 1MDB case, where Najib has suffered a setback in his bid for a stay, but where his substantive appeal is already before the Court of Appeal and his lawyers will now file a fresh application seeking a stay.

The second is the SRC sentence and house-arrest arrangement, where the mechanism for Najib to serve the remainder of his reduced sentence at home has moved forward.

The two should not be conflated.

Indeed, the fact that Najib has received the house-arrest order and its accompanying documentation is significant in its own right.

For the first time, there is greater clarity about what the arrangement means in practical terms: when the conditions are fulfilled, the former prime minister will be able to serve the remainder of his SRC sentence at the home where his family lives.

And yet the future beyond 2028 remains tied to the 1MDB case.

As Shafee explained, if Najib ultimately does not obtain a stay of the 1MDB sentence, he could still face that sentence after the SRC term ends in 2028.

So Wednesday’s ruling did not simply produce a “yes” or “no” outcome for Najib’s future.

It produced another layer of uncertainty.

The Human Side Of The Legal Battle

For someone who has been behind bars since August 2022, the prospect of returning home is about more than legal technicalities.

It means waking up in his own home.

It means being with his family.

It means a very different kind of confinement from prison, even though it remains a form of detention with conditions attached.

And that prospect now exists alongside another battle — one that could determine what happens after 2028.

That is why the disappointment expressed by Shafee matters.

The stay application was, in practical terms, about buying time while the substantive appeal runs its course.

The High Court has said no.

The defence believes it should have said yes.

And now it will ask the Court of Appeal to decide whether the 1MDB sentence should remain on hold while that larger legal battle continues.

The Fight Moves On

For Najib, Wednesday was therefore neither a final victory nor the end of the road.

The immediate hope that the 1MDB sentence could be stayed by the High Court has been dashed.

But the substantive appeal remains alive.

And the defence is preparing another application — this time before the Court of Appeal — to seek the stay it failed to secure at the High Court.

At the same time, there is the prospect of home.

Langgak Duta.

His family.

And the possibility of serving the remainder of his SRC sentence under house arrest, once the conditions of the order are fulfilled.

For Najib, one door has closed.

But another legal door is already opening.

And somewhere in between those two doors is the prospect of home — and, beyond that, another legal battle still waiting to be fought.

For now, however, the message from his legal team is simple:

Stay first.

Then, the fight continues. – NMH

The post For Najib Razak, The Fight Continues first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR: Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur mahu mengucapkan terima kasih kepada golongan penghantar makanan yang setiap hari menjadi penghubung antara restoran, perniagaan dan pelanggan di sekitar Kuala Lumpur.

Menerusi inisiatif “Thank You, Riders!”, penghantar makanan boleh mendapatkan pek sarapan untuk dibawa pulang pada harga hanya RM3 setiap Jumaat, mulai jam 11 pagi, selagi stok masih ada. Pengenalan rider yang sah diperlukan.

Tetapi yang menjadikan inisiatif ini lebih bermakna ialah RM3 yang dibayar oleh rider bukan sekadar harga untuk sebungkus sarapan.

Keseluruhan hasil jualan akan disalurkan kepada tabung kebajikan hotel bagi membantu golongan yang memerlukan.

Maka, dalam satu urusan yang cukup kecil, ada dua bentuk kebaikan berlaku.

Rider mendapat sarapan pada harga berpatutan.

Dan pada masa sama, bayaran mereka turut membantu orang lain.

Dorsett Hargai Abang Rider Dengan Sarapan RM3

Bagi seorang rider yang ditemui, RM3 mungkin nampak kecil kepada sesetengah orang.

Tetapi bagi mereka yang setiap hari perlu mengira perbelanjaan petrol dan keperluan lain, sedikit penjimatan tetap membawa makna.

“RM3 ni kita dapat jimatlah untuk pagi hari. Kita boleh gantikan dengan duit minyak,” katanya.

Rider berkenaan juga sebenarnya masih belajar dan melakukan kerja penghantaran secara sambilan, biasanya ketika cuti atau selepas menghadiri kelas.

Bagi seorang pelajar yang menggunakan masa lapang untuk mencari pendapatan tambahan, beberapa ringgit yang dapat dijimatkan pada waktu pagi boleh membantu mengurus perbelanjaan harian dengan lebih baik.

Seorang lagi rider pula sudah beberapa tahun melakukan kerja penghantaran dan melihat inisiatif itu sebagai sesuatu yang praktikal untuk golongan rider.

Menurutnya, selain dapat menjimatkan kos, lokasi Dorsett Hartamas juga memudahkan rider yang mengambil pesanan di kawasan berkenaan untuk singgah mendapatkan sarapan sebelum meneruskan perjalanan.

“Bagus untuk masyarakat. Benda ni bagus,” katanya.

Di Sebalik Setiap Penghantaran, Ada Cerita

Kehidupan seorang rider mungkin kelihatan mudah dari sudut pelanggan.

Pesanan dibuat.

Rider mengambil makanan.

Beberapa minit atau mungkin lebih lama kemudian, makanan sampai di depan pintu.

Tetapi di sebalik setiap penghantaran itu ada seseorang yang perlu berada di atas motosikal, berdepan kesesakan lalu lintas dan cuaca yang tidak menentu, selain menanggung kos petrol dan penyelenggaraan kenderaan.

Bagi seorang lagi rider yang ditemu bual, kerja penghantaran juga dilakukan secara sambilan bagi mencari pendapatan tambahan. Beliau biasanya mengaktifkan aplikasi Grab sekitar jam 5 petang dan turut bekerja pada hujung minggu.

“Kalau buat satu kerja mana cukup,” katanya.

Ayat yang ringkas, tetapi menggambarkan realiti bahawa bagi sesetengah orang, satu sumber pendapatan mungkin belum mencukupi untuk memenuhi keperluan harian.

Sebab itu, apabila sebuah hotel menyediakan sesuatu yang kecil tetapi benar-benar berguna kepada mereka, penghargaan itu terasa lebih dekat.

Bila Rider Juga Boleh Menyumbang

Bagi Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur, inisiatif ini bukan sekadar tentang menyediakan sarapan murah.

Menurut Sophia Natasha Malik, General Manager Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur, penghantar makanan merupakan sebahagian penting daripada kehidupan seharian dan komuniti.

Hotel itu mahu mewujudkan cara yang mudah tetapi bermakna untuk mengucapkan terima kasih atas usaha mereka, selain menggalakkan semangat memberi kembali kepada masyarakat.

Dan di sinilah “Thank You, Riders!” mempunyai nilai yang tersendiri.

Rider bukan sekadar penerima manfaat.

Mereka juga menjadi sebahagian daripada usaha membantu orang lain.

RM3 yang mereka bayar untuk sarapan membantu mereka menjimatkan sedikit perbelanjaan harian.

Pada masa yang sama, wang yang sama dikumpulkan untuk tabung kebajikan hotel dan disalurkan kepada mereka yang memerlukan.

Satu sarapan.

Satu tanda penghargaan.

Dan satu lagi peluang untuk berbuat baik.

Kebaikan Yang Bermula Dengan RM3

Dalam dunia yang semakin sibuk, kita mungkin tidak selalu terfikir tentang orang di sebalik setiap penghantaran yang kita terima.

Kita hanya nampak makanan sampai.

Tetapi bagi rider, setiap pesanan adalah sebahagian daripada usaha mencari rezeki.

Justeru, mungkin sebab itu penghargaan seperti ini terasa bermakna.

Ia tidak perlu besar.

Tidak perlu mewah.

Kadangkala, cukup dengan menyediakan sarapan yang mampu dibeli, mengucapkan terima kasih dan mengingatkan mereka bahawa usaha mereka turut dilihat dan dihargai.

Dan yang lebih indah, kali ini abang rider sendiri turut diberi peluang untuk membantu orang lain.

Mungkin hanya RM3.

Tetapi kebaikan yang bermula dengan RM3 itu boleh pergi lebih jauh.

Terima kasih, abang rider. – NMH

The post Dorsett Hartamas: Terima Kasih, Abang Rider, Kami Hargai Jasa Anda first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR: Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur is putting a different spin on corporate social responsibility (CSR) by turning something as ordinary as a RM3 breakfast into a two-way community initiative.

Under its “Thank You, Riders!” programme, delivery riders can purchase a takeaway breakfast pack for RM3 every Friday from 11am onwards, while stocks last.

The initiative is designed as a gesture of appreciation for the riders who spend their days connecting businesses and communities across Kuala Lumpur.

But there is another layer to it.

All proceeds from the breakfast sales are chanelled to the hotel’s charity fund to support people in need.

So while the rider receives an affordable breakfast, the RM3 also becomes part of a wider contribution to the community.

It is a small transaction with a potentially bigger social purpose.

Dorsett Turns a Simple Meal Into a Community Loop

At the heart of this initiative is a simple yet meaningful idea for just RM3, a rider enjoys a breakfast and receives something genuinely useful in return, while the proceeds are channelled to a charitable cause. In this way, the rider is not merely a beneficiary, they are a valued participant in a cycle of kindness and giving.

The rider becomes part of the giving.

That distinction is what makes the initiative interesting from a CSR perspective.

For one rider interviewed, the RM3 saving can be put towards petrol.

“RM3 ni kita dapat jimatlah untuk pagi hari. Kita boleh gantikan dengan duit minyak,” he said. (This RM3 can be our saving for the morning. It can be replaced with the cost of pertrol.)

The rider is also a student who does delivery work part-time, usually during his holidays or after classes.

Another rider, who has been doing delivery work for several years, said the initiative could help riders reduce their daily expenses while offering a convenient place to stop for breakfast when collecting orders around Hartamas.

He described it simply as “bagus untuk masyarakat” (good for the community).

For riders, the benefit may seem modest.

But that is precisely where the model becomes interesting.

Dorsett’s Different Approach to CSR

CSR is often associated with large donations, sponsorships or one-off community programmes.

“Thank You, Riders!” takes a more everyday approach.

Instead of simply giving something away, Dorsett has created a product that people can genuinely use, priced it affordably and connected the transaction to a social purpose.

It is not a large financial commitment from the individual rider.

But collectively, those small contributions can support the hotel’s charity fund.

For Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur, it also creates a direct connection with a community that is an increasingly visible part of everyday urban life.

“Delivery riders are an important part of our everyday lives, and we wanted to create a simple yet meaningful way to say thank you for everything they do,” said Sophia Natasha Malik, General Manager of Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur.

She said the initiative was intended not only to show appreciation, but also to encourage a spirit of giving back to the community. Press Release – Helping Community

From Beneficiary to Participant

There is a subtle but important difference between helping a community and involving a community.

In the first model, the company gives and the community receives.

In the second, both sides participate.

That is what makes Dorsett’s RM3 breakfast concept worth looking at from a business and ESG perspective.

The hotel provides the platform.

The rider receives an affordable meal.

The rider’s payment contributes to a social cause.

And the wider community benefits from the proceeds.

The initiative therefore creates a simple cycle of appreciation, participation and giving.

It also gives dignity to the recipient.

The rider is not being positioned as someone who simply needs help. He is a working member of the community who is being recognised for his contribution – and given an opportunity to contribute in return.

Why Small Can Be Meaningful

There is perhaps a broader lesson here for businesses thinking about CSR.

Not every meaningful initiative needs a large budget.

Sometimes, the strongest ideas are those that can be incorporated into everyday business activity and repeated consistently.

“Thank You, Riders!” runs every Friday from 11am, while stocks last, with valid rider identification required and the breakfast available for takeaway only.

Its simplicity may actually be one of its strengths.

There is no elaborate event.

No complicated mechanism.

Just breakfast, a RM3 price tag and a social purpose attached to the transaction.

For the rider, it can mean saving a few ringgit on breakfast and putting that money towards petrol or other daily expenses.

For Dorsett, it becomes a way to recognise an important part of the community while supporting its charitable efforts.

And for the people who ultimately benefit from the charity fund, those small contributions can add up to something more meaningful.

Dorsett Shows That Everyone Can Give

The most interesting aspect of the initiative may be the question it raises for businesses:

What if CSR does not always have to be about giving something away?

What if it can be about creating something people value, making it accessible and then giving them the opportunity to be part of the social impact?

That changes the relationship between business and community.

The company is no longer simply the giver.

The customer, employee or community member is no longer simply the recipient.

Everyone has a role to play.

For Dorsett Hartamas Kuala Lumpur, that idea begins with the people who keep the city moving – one delivery at a time.

And sometimes, giving back does not need to start with a big cheque.

It can start with RM3. – NMH

The post CSR With a Difference: When Giving Back Starts With RM3 first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR: If RM30 million of the RM42 million in dispute was subsequently returned to SRC International, why is the company still seeking the full RM42 million from former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak?

That is one of the central questions raised by Najib’s counsel Muhammad Farhan Muhammad Shafee in his submissions before High Court judge Datuk Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin Shah Raja Mohzan in the civil suit brought by SRC International Sdn Bhd and its subsidiary, Gandingan Mentari Sdn Bhd.

The trial in SRC International Sdn Bhd & Anor v Dato’ Sri Mohd Najib bin Hj Abd Razak (Kuala Lumpur High Court Suit No. WA-22NCvC-340-05/2021) continues tomorrow.

Farhan’s submissions have put the spotlight on the actual movement of the RM42 million, the amount that ultimately remained with Najib, and the evidence required to establish what he knew at the material time.

RM30m that Went Back to SRC

According to the defence’s reconstruction of the banking records, RM32 million was credited into Najib’s Accounts 880 and 906 on 26 December 2014.

Three days later, RM27 million and RM5 million were paid to PBSB and PPC respectively.

But the defence says the money trail did not end there.

On 7 January 2015, RM30 million was credited back into SRC’s own Account 650.

Farhan’s submission argues that this return is reflected in SRC’s own banking records and completes a portion of the fund flow which the Plaintiffs’ own chart stops short of showing.

The defence has highlighted SRC’s “Timeline 5”, introduced during cross-examination in January, which traced the disputed funds into Najib’s accounts and subsequently showed RM27 million and RM5 million being paid out to PBSB and PPC.

But the chart, the defence says, stops at PBSB and PPC.

The defence’s amended chart adds the subsequent RM30 million payment from PBSB back to SRC, effectively closing the loop.

Why Claim RM42m when RM30m was returned?

This is where the defence’s quantum argument comes in.

Farhan argues that an award of the full RM42 million would effectively require Najib to pay SRC RM30 million which SRC had already received back.

The defence cites the principle against double recovery, arguing that any damages or other monetary relief must take into account the RM30 million already returned to SRC.

The defence therefore says that, even if the Court were to find against Najib on liability — which it does not accept — the full RM42 million cannot stand as the amount recoverable.

Its alternative position is that any award should be limited to the amount that actually remained outstanding, with credit given for the RM30 million returned to SRC. …

The Banking Record Behind the RM30m

The defence also challenges the suggestion that the RM30 million payment from PBSB to SRC cannot be connected to the earlier RM27 million transfer.

It points to PBSB’s bank statement, saying the account held only RM1,956 before the RM27 million arrived on 29 December 2014 and returned to RM1,956 after the RM30 million cheque left on 7 January 2015.

The defence argues this makes it difficult to maintain that the RM30 million came from an unrelated source.

A Civil Trial Must Stand on its Own Evidence

Another major plank of Farhan’s submissions is the distinction between the criminal proceedings against Najib and the present civil action.

The defence argues that Najib’s previous criminal conviction cannot simply be treated as proof that the elements of SRC’s civil claims have been established.

The submission points out that the criminal proceedings involved statutory presumptions and different legal tests, whereas the present action requires SRC to prove the specific elements of its civil causes of action.

The defence notes that the Plaintiffs’ own Reply states that “No equivalent presumption is relied upon in this suit” and that the criminal offence elements are not equivalent to the elements of the civil causes of action.

In other words, Farhan’s argument is that the civil case must be decided on the evidence led in this trial — not by simply importing conclusions from the earlier criminal case.

That distinction is particularly important because SRC’s civil claims include knowing receipt, dishonest assistance, misfeasance in public office and abuse of power.

What Did Najib Actually Know?

The defence has also challenged the evidence concerning Najib’s state of mind.

Farhan argues that the Plaintiffs must establish actual knowledge or conscious dishonesty, rather than relying on hindsight or the proposition that Najib ought to have asked more questions.

The defence submission stresses that suspicion is not knowledge and negligence is not dishonesty, and that the Court must examine the evidence available to Najib at the material time.

The BlackBerry Messages — and Najib’s Absence

The defence has also relied heavily on a 264-page collection of BlackBerry messages involving Jho Low, former SRC CEO Nik Faisal Ariff Kamil and AmBank banker Joanna Yu.

One point Farhan’s submission highlights is that there are no messages from Najib in the bundle.

Instead, Najib appears in the conversations as “MNR”, “PM” or “boss” — as the subject of discussions rather than a participant sending messages.

The defence says the chats are important contemporaneous evidence of how the accounts were actually operated by others.

It also points out that the Plaintiffs themselves relied on the same bundle during the trial.

The USD620m Return

The defence has further drawn attention to Najib’s instruction in July 2013 to return USD620 million, which was described in his instruction as the unutilised sum of donations and personal gifts.

The defence says the amount was voluntarily returned long before the RM42 million transactions now under scrutiny and before any allegation against Najib had arisen.

It describes the sum as roughly 48 times the RM42 million at the centre of the present suit. SRC 340 – Knowledge Element Dec…

The argument is that such conduct is relevant to assessing whether Najib could genuinely have believed that monies entering his accounts were legitimate funds rather than money belonging to SRC.

The Question Before the Court

The defence is therefore asking the Court to look beyond the headline figure of RM42 million.

Its case is that the banking evidence shows RM30 million came back to SRC, that the Plaintiffs’ own fund-flow chart does not show the complete trail, and that the evidence of what Najib actually knew must be examined independently of the earlier criminal proceedings.

For Najib, the defence submission is ultimately about three questions: where did the money go, how much actually remained with him, and what did he know at the time?

The Plaintiffs are expected to respond to these arguments when the trial continues tomorrow before Justice Raja Ahmad Mohzanuddin. – NMH

The post RM42m SRC Suit: If RM30m Came Back To SRC, Why Is The Full Amount Still Being Claimed? first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR: Tahanan rumah merupakan satu mekanisme berbeza dalam sistem hukuman yang membolehkan seseorang banduan menjalani hukuman di luar penjara, tertakluk kepada syarat yang ditetapkan, kata peguam Datuk Seri Najib Razak, Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

Beliau berkata tahanan rumah tidak sama dengan remisi atau parol, yang mempunyai mekanisme dan proses tersendiri.

Pengampunan diraja, yang merupakan sebahagian daripada kuasa prerogatif Yang di-Pertuan Agong di bawah Perkara 42 Perlembagaan Persekutuan, turut mendapat perhatian meluas bukan sahaja di dalam negara tetapi juga di peringkat antarabangsa.

Pelbagai persoalan dan spekulasi mengenai pelaksanaan pengampunan bersyarat serta tahanan rumah Najib turut muncul sejak pengumuman dibuat pada 18 September lalu. Shafee sendiri berkata beliau dihujani pertanyaan dan memilih untuk tidak membuat spekulasi kerana masih terdapat perkara yang belum diperjelaskan secara rasmi.

Justeru, sidang media itu memberi ruang kepada Shafee untuk menjelaskan beberapa perkara yang menurutnya telah menimbulkan kekeliruan, termasuk perbezaan antara tahanan rumah, remisi dan parol serta kedudukan syarat yang dikenakan di bawah pengampunan tersebut.

Rekod “Exemplary” Sepanjang Berada Dalam Tahanan

Shafee turut menjelaskan bahawa apabila sesuatu cadangan berkaitan pengampunan atau pengurangan hukuman dikemukakan, antara perkara yang akan dinilai ialah laporan mengenai kelakuan dan aktiviti seseorang banduan sepanjang berada dalam tahanan.

Dalam kes Najib, Shafee berkata laporan mengenai kelakuan dan aktiviti beliau sepanjang berada di penjara adalah “exemplary”.

Penilaian itu menarik perhatian kerana kehidupan dalam tahanan boleh memberikan tekanan dan cabaran yang besar kepada seseorang individu, termasuk dari segi disiplin, emosi dan penyesuaian diri.

Dalam kes Najib, menurut Shafee, rekod yang dilaporkan kepada pihak berkuasa kekal “exemplary”.

Bagi mereka yang telah mengikuti perjalanan Najib sejak beliau berada dalam politik dan perkhidmatan awam — daripada ahli politik, menteri dan Timbalan Perdana Menteri hingga Perdana Menteri — perkara itu juga boleh dilihat sebagai kesinambungan disiplin, perwatakan dan etika kerja yang sama ketika beliau berdepan keadaan yang jauh berbeza di dalam penjara.

Tahanan Rumah Bukan Untuk VIP

Shafee turut menolak tanggapan bahawa tahanan rumah merupakan satu bentuk keistimewaan yang hanya diberikan kepada VIP atau bekas pemimpin.

Menurutnya, tahanan rumah boleh dilaksanakan dalam keadaan tertentu selagi seseorang itu masih berstatus banduan dan tertakluk kepada hukuman.

Beliau berkata persoalan yang lebih penting ialah rasional di sebalik tahanan rumah, bukan siapa yang diberikan kemudahan tersebut.

Menurut Shafee, antara tujuan tahanan rumah ialah membantu seseorang banduan menyesuaikan diri semula dengan struktur sosial dan kehidupan bermasyarakat selepas berada dalam penjara untuk tempoh yang panjang.

Beliau memberi contoh seseorang yang menjalani hukuman selama bertahun-tahun mungkin menjadi semakin terpisah daripada kehidupan dan masyarakat di luar.

Tahanan rumah, katanya, boleh memberi ruang kepada seseorang banduan untuk menyesuaikan diri semula secara berperingkat sebelum kembali menjalani kehidupan dalam masyarakat.

Shafee menegaskan bahawa rasional tersebut bukan khusus untuk Najib atau mana-mana golongan tertentu, sebaliknya boleh terpakai kepada banduan secara umum.

Apa Berlaku Selepas RM50 Juta Dibayar?

Mengenai syarat pembayaran RM50 juta, Shafee berkata beliau tidak dapat memastikan sama ada pembayaran tersebut akan membawa kepada pembebasan Najib ke tahanan rumah pada hari yang sama.

Beliau berkata terdapat kemungkinan timbul persoalan atau cabaran undang-undang lain, dan kerana itu beliau tidak mahu membuat sebarang ramalan mengenai apa yang akan berlaku pada hari pembayaran dibuat.

“Saya tidak tahu,” katanya ketika ditanya mengenai perkara tersebut.

Mengapa Tahanan Rumah Tidak Berlaku Lebih Awal?

Shafee turut ditanya mengapa tahanan rumah tidak dilaksanakan lebih awal, memandangkan terdapat perintah berkaitan tahanan rumah yang dikaitkan dengan Yang di-Pertuan Agong terdahulu.

Menurut Shafee, perintah tersebut sebelum ini tidak diiktiraf.

Beliau menyifatkan keadaan itu sebagai “travesty of justice”.

Katanya, Yang di-Pertuan Agong sekarang telah mempertimbangkan semula perkara berkenaan dan memberikan tahanan rumah, dengan syarat bayaran yang ditetapkan dipenuhi.

Kuasa Pengampunan Terletak Pada Yang di-Pertuan Agong

Shafee turut menyentuh mengenai kekeliruan berhubung keperluan mendapatkan perintah mahkamah bagi melaksanakan keputusan berkaitan pengampunan.

Beliau menegaskan bahawa mahkamah tidak mempunyai kuasa untuk memberikan pengampunan.

Menurutnya, kuasa tersebut terletak pada Yang di-Pertuan Agong, dan dokumen rasmi berkaitan keputusan itu perlu datang daripada pihak berkuasa yang berkaitan.

Shafee berkata beliau telah membuat pertanyaan rasmi mengenai dokumen berkenaan.

Bagaimanapun, beliau menegaskan bahawa sebarang kelewatan dalam pelaksanaan tidak seharusnya secara automatik dikaitkan dengan Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

“Jangan salahkan Yang di-Pertuan Agong,” katanya, sambil menjelaskan bahawa proses melaksanakan sesuatu keputusan merupakan perkara berbeza daripada pihak yang mempunyai kuasa untuk membuat keputusan tersebut.

Perkembangan Rayuan Kes 1MDB

Sidang media Shafee itu turut berlangsung selepas pengurusan kes permohonan Najib untuk menangguhkan pelaksanaan hukuman dalam kes 1MDB di Mahkamah Tinggi Kuala Lumpur pada Khamis, dengan mahkamah menetapkan 14 Oktober untuk mendengar permohonan berkenaan.

Perkembangan itu menjadi antara perkara yang disentuh Shafee ketika bertemu media selepas prosiding tersebut, selain menjelaskan kedudukan tahanan rumah dan perkara berkaitan pengampunan bersyarat Najib.

Menunggu Kepastian

Bagi Najib dan keluarganya, setiap perkembangan ini bukan sekadar proses undang-undang yang perlu dilalui, tetapi turut menentukan bila beliau boleh kembali bersama keluarga dan menjalani baki hukumannya di rumah.

Semakin lama proses itu mengambil masa, semakin panjang juga tempoh penantian dan perpisahan yang perlu dilalui.

Buat masa ini, beberapa perkara masih menunggu keputusan dan pelaksanaan, termasuk permohonan penangguhan hukuman kes 1MDB, pembayaran RM50 juta serta proses rasmi berkaitan tahanan rumah.

Bagi seorang banduan dan keluarganya, setiap hari yang berlalu sementara menunggu kepastian mempunyai makna yang tersendiri. – NMH

The post Tahanan Rumah: Shafee Jelaskan Perbezaannya Dengan Remisi, Parol first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR, Sept 10 — Malaysian musicians need more than occasional financial assistance when they fall sick or into hardship — they need a sustainable platform that allows them to earn a living, build savings and grow old with dignity, says Musicians for Musicians (MfM) president Francis Danker.

Danker said the music fraternity had reached a point where musicians, particularly veterans and younger players entering the industry, were struggling to find regular places to perform, with many also facing delayed or non-payment for their work.

“We don’t get any help from the government. We just got to help ourselves,” he said at a press conference here today to announce MfM’s fourth annual benefit concert, “Rocking for a Cause”, which will be held on Oct 10 at Dewan Tunku, Kelab Golf Negara Subang (KGNS), Petaling Jaya.

But Danker stressed that the association’s role should not be confined to helping musicians who were already in crisis.

“We have to think of the future. We have to think of the younger people that are coming up. We cannot leave them alone,” he said.

He proposed that the Government, tourism industry and hotels work with the music fraternity to establish dedicated entertainment spaces featuring Malaysian musicians, particularly in five-star hotels and resorts.

His vision is to see modern musicians performing alongside traditional musicians, creating a distinctly Malaysian sound for both domestic audiences and international tourists.

“Why can’t we play with a sape and combine it with the rebana? Put them together and create something different,” he said.

“Every resort must have a lounge — not a bunch of Filipinos, but really local musicians. Spreading our culture.”

Danker said Malaysia already had a rich musical heritage and a wealth of traditional instruments and songs which could be reinvented for contemporary audiences.

“We have so many of our old tunes from P. Ramlee’s time until here, which we can redo and modernise. And that’s what the tourists want to see,” he said.

“They want to taste our culture, they want to eat our food, they want to see our handicraft, and they want to hear our music.”

He suggested that traditional instruments such as the sape, gambus, sitar and rebana could be combined with modern equipment and contemporary arrangements.

“Who says you cannot play ‘Hotel California’ on a sape? Show them!” he said, drawing laughter and applause from those present.

For Danker, creating regular employment is also about giving musicians a future beyond performing from one gig to another.

Everybody May Want To Be A Musician

“If all the hotels take us in and give us work, can you imagine? Everybody may want to be a musician, everybody wants to work, everybody wants to form their own kind of fusion band,” he said.

Such a platform, he added, could also provide musicians with more stable employment benefits such as EPF contributions, giving them some financial security when they grow older.

Danker, who recalled starting out in music because he had not passed his Standard Six examination, said the situation facing musicians today was markedly different from the 1970s.

“During my time, we had Filipino bands, Indonesian bands, Singapore bands. We had bands from Jamaica. And we were always working,” he said.

“You know why? Because we had more clubs than bands. Today, they are all gone. There are no more clubs.”

He said the disappearance of entertainment venues had left many talented musicians without a dependable place to work.

“It’s tough out there. These musicians are all talented people,” he said, adding that the association regularly received complaints from musicians who had performed at venues but were still waiting weeks to be paid.

“These people are working on a day-to-day basis. They need that small income. And that also they don’t get paid.”

From Helping the Old to Building A Future for the Young

MfM honorary secretary Latifah Abdullah said the association currently has more than 800 registered members, ranging from 18 to musicians in their 80s, with about 300 to 400 considered active members.

She said one of MfM’s key objectives was to make younger musicians more aware of the association and what it could offer them.

“We want them to know that we exist. We exist. We need to be recognised,” she said.

Latifah said younger musicians also brought different perspectives and ideas to the fraternity, making their participation important to the association’s future.

“We need more younger generation to come in because their perception, their ideology, everything is different,” she said.

Deputy president Edwin Nathaniel said the benefit concert was also intended to bring together different generations of musicians while recognising those who had devoted decades to the Malaysian music industry.

This year, MfM will honour 20 musicians who have spent between 40 and 50 years in the industry and are still active, with the identities to be revealed during the concert itself.

Among the performers lined up are Electric Orgasm, marking its 50-year reunion, Datuk Francissca Peter, Goblokes, Heavy Machine, Dato’ Leonard Tan, Lighthouse featuring Vijay David, Royston Sta Maria, Os Pombos, The Polymaths featuring Raja Singham and The Studio 10 Experience.

The concert will also feature tributes to legendary musicians and bands that helped shape Malaysia’s music scene.

Nathaniel said Heavy Machine would be among those receiving a special tribute, particularly to saxophonist Olie, who is unwell. His daughter is expected to perform with the band in his place.

Mulanya Di Sini

A tribute will also be paid to musicians who have passed on, including Seha and Gani, with Royston Sta Maria expected to perform “Mulanya Di Sini” as part of the tribute.

Royston, who is travelling from Australia for the event, said he was pleased to be part of a concert that uses music to support fellow musicians facing difficult circumstances.

“I think it’s a wonderful concert where musicians come together to use their talents to raise money to help their fellow musicians who have fallen on hard times or are unable to work due to their health situation.”

He also urged the media and public to support the event.

“I hope the press will give this show their full support and the public will also get their tickets soon to make this night a success and an unforgettable experience,” he said.

Target of RM100,000

Nathaniel said MfM is hoping to raise RM100,000 from this year’s benefit concert.

The association has received support from several sponsors, including Weststar, which has backed the event for several years, while KJ&S and Memories are among those providing sponsorship and support for the production, sound and lighting.

The money raised will go towards supporting musicians in need, while MfM also hopes to channel part of its resources towards developing the music industry.

“This is our goal, to raise that amount of money, but it all depends on the turnout and the last-minute corporate sponsors,” Nathaniel said.

He described MfM as a zero-based NGO, with the committee members themselves volunteering their time.

Danker said this spirit was at the heart of the association.

A Committee of Musicians

“Everyone in the committee are all musicians — still playing, retired — everybody is just doing it for nothing. Just to see who we can help.”

He said MfM had already assisted musicians facing illness and hardship, including helping families when musicians died with little or no financial resources.

But he insisted that the fraternity could not simply continue responding to crises after they occurred.

“We need to give these musicians a lifeline. We need to give them a place where they can depend on,” he said.

“We want to do this for the younger people. Set a platform for them.”

And that, perhaps, is the deeper message behind Rocking for a Cause: not merely to raise money for musicians who have fallen on hard times, but to remind Malaysians that the people who created, performed and preserved the country’s musical soundtrack also need a place in its future.

“We cannot let the young musicians think this persatuan is only for old people, old musicians,” Danker said.

“We need to do this. We have no choice.” – NMH

Event details

MfM Benefit Showcase 2026 – Rocking for a Cause
Saturday, Oct 10, 2026
4pm onwards
Dewan Tunku, Kelab Golf Negara Subang (KGNS), Petaling Jaya

Tickets include MFM member tickets at RM85, while general admission is RM105 per person, inclusive of a complimentary drink. Table packages are also available, including Standard (RM1,050 for 10 pax), Golden Hearts (RM3,000) and Diamond Hearts (RM5,000).

The post ‘We Need A Lifeline’: MFM President Calls For Hotels To Open Their Stages To Malaysian Musicians first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR, 03 September 2026 — Impact investing does not necessarily mean accepting lower returns, with investors increasingly looking at whether environmental and social outcomes – ESGs – can translate into stronger businesses, greater market share and ultimately better financial performance.

That was one of the key messages from the “Beyond Impact & ESG: Investing for Outcomes and Returns in Southeast Asia” panel at the Malaysia Private Capital Forum 2026, where speakers discussed efforts to establish a clearer relationship between impact outcomes and investment returns.

The session, moderated by Jamie He of Lockton Companies, brought together representatives from PRI, Impact Circle, AiSED and Bintang Capital. The official programme identified the panellists as Chee Leng Hor, Melissa Ong, Zehan Teoh and Ee Rong Song.

Impact Investing: Beyond the Label

One of the speakers said the aim was to generate empirical data showing whether improved environmental performance could translate into financial value through greater brand equity, larger market share and operating-cost savings.

On the social side, greater gender diversity and stronger employee engagement were cited as factors that could improve organisational performance and, eventually, financial returns.

But the speaker was careful not to claim that the relationship had already been conclusively established.

“It’s our own experiment … I don’t have the answer,” the speaker said, adding that the objective was to try different approaches and see how they performed.

That admission was significant: the argument for impact investing was not presented as a settled formula, but as an area where investors are increasingly attempting to establish a measurable link between non-financial outcomes and financial performance.

The panellists also challenged what they described as a misconception that incorporating impact necessarily compromises returns.

Examples were cited of impact funds that had consistently ranked in the top quartile of performance, as well as a Singapore-based impact fund pursuing venture-style returns.

There was, however, recognition that the time required to demonstrate outcomes can vary significantly between sectors.

Agriculture, for example, may require a longer investment horizon than the conventional 10-year fund period before the full impact of an investment can be demonstrated.

From ESG Reporting to Measurable Outcomes

The discussion also suggested that impact investing is increasingly moving beyond the traditional ESG reporting framework.

The panellists pointed to mainstream venture capital investors beginning to identify outcomes aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, even when environmental considerations are not the original investment thesis.

An education-technology company in Vietnam was cited as an example. Rather than measuring only the number of students enrolled, investors were looking at improvements in students’ academic performance.

That shift — from counting activities to measuring outcomes — was central to the panel’s argument.

As one speaker put it, going “beyond ESG” does not mean abandoning ESG.

It means moving past labels and reporting requirements towards outcomes that are more concrete and measurable.

The distinction between public and private markets was also raised. Listed companies operate within more standardised ESG disclosure requirements, while private capital investors have greater flexibility to develop their own methods of measuring outcomes.

ECF and P2P: From Access to Capital to Getting a Return

The next discussion turned from impact investing to a more immediate question for Malaysian businesses: what happens after companies get access to alternative capital?

The panel on “From Crowd to Capital Stack: The Next Phase of ECF and P2P in Malaysia” examined the development of equity crowdfunding and peer-to-peer financing after more than a decade of operation.

Malaysia was the first jurisdiction in the Asia-Pacific region to establish an equity crowdfunding framework, with the framework introduced in 2015, while P2P financing was regulated in 2016. The moderator noted that ECF had raised close to RM1 billion through 445 campaigns, while P2P financing had raised RM11.3 billion across 150,000 campaigns.

But the headline numbers mask a significant challenge: exits.

For ECF investors, getting into a company is only the beginning. If there is no credible route to an exit, investors ultimately cannot realise their returns.

Elain Lockman said exits remained one of the biggest challenges after a decade of ECF activity, while Goh Boon Peng said his platform had only seen its first project exit after six years.

Investor education is another concern.

Lockman pointed to competition from other investment products and said retail investors needed to better understand alternative investments, particularly at a time when investment scams were also rising.

The Money Comes With Responsibility

For issuers, the challenge is not simply raising money.

Panellists repeatedly returned to governance, reporting and accountability.

Goh said some SME founders did not initially understand their responsibilities towards investors, while Lockman stressed that money raised from investors was not simply the founders’ own money.

“It’s this hard-earned income of other people’s money that you have to give a return,” she said.

The panel argued that companies need to treat fundraising as part of their broader business strategy rather than something they turn to only when cash runs short.

For companies hoping eventually to move towards an IPO, governance, internal controls, reporting and shareholder responsibilities become even more important.

Goh described efforts by his platform to encourage issuers to participate in CEO roundtables and regular sessions on compliance, internal controls and other aspects of running a company.

Building a Capital Stack

The discussion also highlighted a more mature view of alternative financing: ECF and P2P do not necessarily have to compete with venture capital, private equity or bank financing.

Instead, different forms of capital can work together.

P2P financing, for example, can provide working capital without requiring founders to dilute their equity, while ECF can provide equity capital for longer-term growth.

Vincent Soh said P2P financing could potentially serve a much larger portion of Malaysia’s alternative-debt market, while institutional investors were increasingly participating in the space.

The panellists also highlighted growing cooperation across different parts of the capital stack.

Rather than seeing ECF, P2P, venture capital and private equity as isolated channels, participants said greater collaboration could help fill financing gaps and create a more robust funding ecosystem.

From One-Off Fundraising to the Next Round

Another emerging theme was repeat capital.

Companies that raise money through ECF need to plan beyond their first fundraising round, particularly if they intend to scale.

Goh said his platform had companies that had raised at least twice, with several raising three times, while stressing that issuers should plan for two or three fundraising rounds rather than assuming one campaign would be sufficient.

But repeated fundraising also brings another issue: valuation.

The moderator warned that a high valuation at one stage is meaningless if the company cannot sustain it. A subsequent “down round” can create significant problems for both founders and investors.

The ultimate objective, Goh suggested, should be to build towards a credible destination — potentially an IPO — with valuations and growth expectations grounded in realistic benchmarks.

Taken together, the two afternoon discussions pointed to a common theme.

Whether the investment is driven by impact outcomes or alternative financing, the industry is moving beyond simply asking whether capital can be raised.

The harder questions are becoming: What does the capital achieve? Can those outcomes be measured? Can the business grow? Can investors ultimately realise a return? And can the company become strong enough to attract the next round of capital?

For Malaysia’s evolving private-capital ecosystem, those may be the questions that matter most. – NMH

The post Beyond ESG: Impact Investing Is About Better Business, Not Lower Returns first appeared on NMH.

Selama hampir tujuh tahun, Datin Seri Rosmah Mansor bukan sahaja berdepan proses mahkamah.

Beliau turut berdepan “mahkamah masyarakat” — dan di media sosial, hukuman sudah lama dijatuhkan.

Pelbagai cerita diulang sehingga menjadi “fakta” bagi ramai orang. Antaranya, dakwaan bahawa wang projek solar hibrid RM1.25 bilion itu ialah wang untuk anak-anak sekolah di pedalaman Sarawak yang akhirnya digunakan untuk kepentingan peribadi.

Tetapi hari ini, Mahkamah Rayuan membuka satu lagi ruang untuk bukti diuji.

Panel tiga hakim yang dipengerusikan Datuk Azhahari Kamal Ramli, bersama Datuk Dr Choo Kah Sing dan Datuk Muniandy a/l Kannyappan, membenarkan Rosmah mengemukakan keterangan tambahan, termasuk keterangan baharu daripada saksi pendakwaan ke-16, Rayyan Radzwill Abdullah.

Ini bukan bermakna Rosmah sudah bebas.

Mahkamah juga belum memutuskan bahawa keterangan baharu itu benar.

Tetapi mahkamah memutuskan ia cukup penting untuk didengar dan diuji.

Persoalan Yang Sejak Dulu Mengganggu

Saya mengikuti perbicaraan ini dan berada di mahkamah ketika banyak perkara berlaku.

Sejak awal, saya tertanya-tanya tentang kedudukan Rizal Mansor — yang pada mulanya didakwa bersama Rosmah sebelum menjadi saksi pendakwaan.

Saya juga tertanya-tanya mengenai persoalan asas: siapa sebenarnya melihat wang itu diserahkan kepada Rosmah?

Keterangan baharu Rayyan kini menimbulkan persoalan bahawa beliau sendiri tidak melihat Rizal menyerahkan atau mengenal pasti beg wang kepada Rosmah, dan pengetahuannya mengenai perkara itu datang daripada orang lain.

Begitu juga dakwaan bahawa arahan dan komunikasi berkaitan bayaran disampaikan melalui Rizal, bukan secara langsung daripada Rosmah.

Ini bukan bermakna dakwaan baharu itu sudah terbukti.

Tetapi bukankah persoalan-persoalan sebegini patut diuji di mahkamah, bukan dihukum di media sosial?

“Today Justice Has Been Served”

Selepas keputusan itu, peguam utama Rosmah, Datuk Amer Hamzah Arshad, berkata:

“Today justice has been served.”

Beliau juga berkata mengenai keterangan baharu itu:

“We want it to be tested.”

Dan saya rasa di situlah letaknya makna keputusan hari ini.

Rosmah belum menang.

Sabitannya belum diketepikan.

Tetapi selepas tujuh tahun, dia akhirnya mendapat peluang untuk membawa persoalan-persoalan itu kembali ke tempat yang sepatutnya.

Bukan Facebook.
Bukan TikTok.
Bukan netizen.

Mahkamah.

Dan bagi seseorang yang telah bertahun-tahun dihukum, dicaci dan dilabel oleh masyarakat, saya rasa sedikit kelegaan itu memang wajar.

Tujuh tahun dihukum. Hari ini, akhirnya didengar. – NMH

The post Rosmah Mansor: Tujuh Tahun Dihukum, Hari Ini Akhirnya Didengar first appeared on NMH.

There was something unsettling about the sight of three former prime ministers facing separate legal proceedings in Malaysia today.

For some, it was apparently a moment to celebrate. For others, an opportunity to gloat.

I find that response disappointing.

Not because former prime ministers should be above the law. They should not.

Not because those who have held the highest political office should not be held accountable. They absolutely should.

And certainly not because anyone should be protected if there is evidence of corruption, abuse of power or personal enrichment.

But because the spectacle raises a much bigger question — one that goes far beyond Najib Razak, Muhyiddin Yassin, Ismail Sabri Yaakob, UMNO or Bersatu.

What does this say about the way Malaysia understands executive power, political accountability and the exercise of judgement at the highest level of government?

That is a question Corporate Malaysia and investors should be asking.

Nobody should be above the law. But neither should every decision become a potential crime.

A Prime Minister is elected precisely because we expect that person to make decisions.

Some will be good. Some will be bad. Some will be controversial. Some will ultimately prove to be mistakes.

That is governance.

Prime ministers make decisions on infrastructure, procurement, national security, foreign investment, subsidies, GLCs, public-private partnerships and economic policy — often with incomplete information and competing interests.

If a decision made in good faith subsequently produces a bad outcome, that does not automatically make it corrupt.

There is a fundamental difference between bad judgement and criminal conduct; policy failure and abuse of power; political accountability and criminal liability.

If we lose sight of those distinctions, we risk creating a government culture in which nobody wants to make a decision.

Imagine being the next Prime Minister

Imagine being a newly elected Prime Minister.

You are expected to make bold decisions, attract investment, approve major projects and take calculated risks in the national interest.

Then you look at the leaders who came before you and ask:

“If I make a difficult decision today, can someone ten years from now decide that my judgement was wrong and turn that decision into a criminal allegation?”

That is not a healthy question for any executive government to contemplate.

Nor is it healthy for civil servants, government-linked companies, boards and corporate executives who must implement those decisions.

The result can be decision paralysis.

People stop taking responsibility. Approvals multiply. Everyone wants another committee, another opinion, another layer of protection.

The safest decision becomes the one nobody makes.

And countries do not become competitive that way.

Investors are looking for predictability

Foreign investors do not simply ask whether Malaysia has good infrastructure, skilled workers or attractive incentives.

They ask whether Malaysia is predictable.

Can a company rely on a government contract?

Will a regulatory decision survive a change in administration?

Are institutions independent?

Are rules applied consistently?

Can legitimate business decisions be defended years later?

Capital is mobile. Investors can choose Malaysia, Vietnam, Indonesia, Thailand, Singapore or elsewhere.

The competition is not merely about tax rates or incentives.

It is about confidence.

Today’s enforcement action can, of course, send a positive message if it demonstrates that no political leader is above the law.

But there is another side to the equation.

If investors begin to believe that legitimate executive decisions can be revisited years later through a politically charged lens, that too becomes a risk.

The rule of law must mean more than the ability to prosecute. It must also mean predictability in how the law is applied.

Should Prime Ministers have some protection while in office?

Perhaps Malaysia should be prepared to have this difficult conversation.

We could consider a form of qualified immunity for a sitting Prime Minister in respect of bona fide official acts undertaken in the exercise of constitutional and executive functions.

Not blanket immunity.

Not immunity for corruption, bribery, embezzlement, personal enrichment or deliberate abuse of office.

Rather, protection for legitimate executive decision-making while a person is entrusted with running the government.

The principle should be simple:

Protect the office. Do not protect corruption.

Once the person leaves office, accountability should resume.

But any reform must be extremely careful about retrospectivity. Parliament should not create a new criminal offence and then apply it to conduct that was lawful when it occurred.

If Malaysia is serious about reforming the relationship between executive authority and legal accountability, the answer should be to establish clear rules for tomorrow — not rewrite yesterday’s criminal law.

This is not about protecting three men

Perhaps this is what some of my friends are missing when they snicker at today’s events.

You can believe that Najib should answer for whatever the courts determine.

You can believe Muhyiddin should face trial.

You can believe Ismail Sabri should answer the charge brought against him.

And you can still believe that Malaysia needs to think very seriously about what this means for the institution of executive government.

Those positions are not contradictory.

This is not about Malays.

It is not about UMNO.

It is not about Bersatu.

It is not even about three former prime ministers.

It is about whether Malaysia is building a political system governed by strong institutions — or one in which every change of government risks turning the decisions of the previous government into a new battlefield.

That distinction matters enormously to Corporate Malaysia.

It matters to CEOs and boards. It matters to civil servants. It matters to foreign investors.

And it matters to the next Prime Minister.

We should want our Prime Ministers to be afraid of breaking the law.

We should not want them to be afraid of making a decision.

Malaysia needs leaders who can exercise judgement, institutions capable of holding them accountable, and laws clear enough to tell the difference.

That is not weakness.

That is institutional maturity.

And perhaps, instead of laughing at three former Prime Ministers appearing in court on the same day, we should be asking ourselves a much more consequential question:

What kind of country do we want the next Prime Minister to inherit — and what kind of country do we want investors to believe Malaysia is? – NMH

The post When Former Prime Ministers Go to Court, What Message Are We Sending Investors? first appeared on NMH.

KUALA LUMPUR, 23 August — The BRICS-ASEAN Chamber of Commerce has announced the establishment of an independent commission for trade and economy, with its president Thayalan Nathan describing the initiative as a step towards strengthening economic links between BRICS and ASEAN.

The announcement was made at the BRICS-ASEAN Business Round Table 2026 at Mines Beach Resort today, where business leaders, diplomats and trade representatives discussed opportunities spanning trade, investment, tourism, technology and economic development.

While details of the commission’s structure and mandate were not disclosed at the event, the announcement came against a backdrop of calls for closer commercial links between ASEAN, BRICS and emerging markets.

BRICS and the Opportunity Beyond Tourism

One of the more substantive proposals came from Kapten Mahadzir Tan Sri Mansor, president of the Malaysia International Tourism Development Association (MITDA), who argued that tourism should be viewed not simply as an industry but as an economic engine.

He challenged the conventional focus on tourist arrival numbers, asking instead what economic activity is activated by each visitor.

A tourist does not simply purchase a flight, hotel room or meal, he said. The visitor creates demand across airlines, hotels, restaurants, transport providers, retail, technology companies and other businesses, and may subsequently return, bring family members, recommend a destination or even become a business partner or investor.

“One tourist is not one transaction,” was the central message of his presentation, which argued that each visitor can activate an entire economic ecosystem.

Mahadzir said the economic cycle begins with tourism creating demand, which drives business activity, trade and investment, eventually generating employment and income.

He also highlighted technology as an increasingly important part of that cycle, with modern tourism driven by digital booking, artificial intelligence and data, cybersecurity, digital payments, smart destinations, mobility and digital marketing.

“Tourism connects the physical and digital economy,” he argued.

MITDA Proposes BRICS-ASEAN Tourism Bridge

Against this backdrop, Mahadzir proposed a BRICS-ASEAN Tourism Bridge, describing it as a potential mechanism for connecting the tourism ecosystems of the two groupings.

The concept goes beyond connecting destinations, he said, bringing together people, cultures, businesses, markets, investment, technology and economies.

He also proposed a broader BRICS Tourism Economic Alliance, bringing together government, the tourism industry, businesses, investors, technology companies and SMEs.

Under the model, government provides the enabling environment, industry develops products and experiences, businesses create transactions, while investors build capacity.

Mahadzir said the opportunity was not merely about increasing tourist flows but about asking a more fundamental question: how much economic value does each tourist activate?

He also linked tourism to wider regional cooperation, arguing that when people travel, they meet; when they meet, they develop greater understanding; and when businesses connect, they trade.

The proposed tourism bridge was therefore presented not only as an economic initiative but also as a potential platform for greater people-to-people engagement between BRICS and ASEAN.

Mauritius Sees Malaysia as Gateway to Africa

The broader push for stronger cross-regional economic links was echoed by Mauritius High Commissioner to Malaysia Rabin Gungoo, who positioned Mauritius as a potential gateway for Malaysian businesses, education providers and investors seeking access to Africa.

Gungoo said there were already strong education links between Mauritius and Malaysia, noting that about 3,000 Mauritian students are currently studying in Malaysia.

He called for more Malaysian educational institutions to establish campuses in Mauritius, saying they could serve not only Mauritian students but also students from other African countries, including Madagascar and Seychelles.

The High Commissioner also highlighted Mauritius’ French- and English-speaking environment as an advantage for businesses and students seeking to operate across different markets.

Beyond education, Gungoo encouraged Malaysian investors to use Mauritius as a platform to penetrate the wider African market, pointing to the country’s existing links and trade arrangements with African countries.

He also noted existing Malaysia-Mauritius trade in areas including automotive products, dried fruits and water, suggesting that the relationship could be expanded further.

The remarks provided a practical dimension to the broader BRICS-ASEAN discussion, with Mauritius presenting itself as a bridge through which Malaysian education, trade and investment could reach African markets.

From Tourism to Wider Economic Connectivity

The discussions at the round table pointed towards a broader interpretation of regional economic cooperation — one in which tourism, education, technology, trade and investment are interconnected rather than treated as separate sectors.

For Malaysia, the emerging opportunity lies not only in attracting visitors or promoting destinations, but in using tourism and business connectivity to activate wider economic relationships across ASEAN, BRICS and markets beyond the two blocs.

The BRICS-ASEAN Business Round Table brought together diplomatic representatives, business leaders and trade stakeholders to explore these opportunities, with the day’s programme also featuring networking and business pitching sessions. – NMH

The post BRICS-ASEAN Chamber Unveils Independent Commission To Strengthen Trade and Economic Ties first appeared on NMH.