Saifuddin says that house arrest is only for interim remand

Home minister Saifuddin Nasution Ismail says the house arrest bill only applies to individuals held pending court proceedings. House arrest will not be applicable for individuals imprisoned for major crimes, including those with life sentences or the death penalty, said Saifuddin.

Ineligible crimes include those with jail sentences of 10 years or more, domestic violence, the Anti-Trafficking in Persons and Anti-Smuggling of Migrants Act 2007, and Chapter Six of the Penal Code (for state offenses).

He concluded today’s home ministry-level Dewan Rakyat debate on the 2025 supply law by saying, “We are targeting (for the bill to apply to) remand orders not involving the mentioned offenses.”

Saifuddin said the administration wants to allow the courts to decide if a suspect should be given house arrest, adding that health grounds might be considered.
In his 2025 budget statement, Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim indicated the government will develop a new Act enabling home arrest for certain crimes.

Offenders will have to stay in their homes or care centers for the duration of their sentences under this proposed law. Government spokesperson Fahmi Fadzil said the law has nothing to do with former prime minister Najib Razak, who is serving a reduced six-year sentence in the SRC International case at Kajang.

Today, Saifuddin stated that the measure will align with the Prisons Act 1995, which gives the home minister the discretion to declare certain places as prisons.

He was answering Ramkarpal Singh’s (PH-Bukit Gelugor) query on whether the house arrest measure will change or repeal the Act.

“The Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) recommends a new bill amending the Act. We will align it with the existing Act, he said.

Saifuddin stated that the AGC’s advice is also based on legal interpretations of the electronic monitoring devices used by house arrestees.

He said laws should classify such gadgets as “instruments of restraint,” which the AGC defines as handcuffs. “But the home ministry recommends expanding the interpretation of such instruments beyond handcuffs.

“The minister’s discretion to declare a place a prison is one thing, but placing suspects under house arrest wearing such devices does not meet the current definition of ‘instruments of restraint’.
He continued, “That is why we created the bill according to the AGC’s advice.”
The Prisons Regulations 2000 define “instruments of restraint” as handcuffs, chains, irons, and straitjackets.