Some people just don't get it.
The Pakatan government of Perak or should I say the DAP government seems to have plenty of recalcitrants.As stubborn as a mule.
From the menteri besar, appointed to be one because the Perak State Constitution says The MB must be Malay and a Muslim. Otherwise, the MB would be from DAP, because as a single entity they have the biggest number of seats . Naturally, they would want the MB post. If that was the scenario than we would have two states under DAP control.
Perak is actually under their control and MB Nizar or ex-MB rather, is under their patronage, a stoker of some kind if not a stooge.He has successfully stoked the fire of discontent.
Ousted Speaker Sivakumar insisted that he still holds office, he has God-given immunity against being sacked.He can make decision to do anything in the assembly and no court can question him and make judgement against his decision.He is the all mighty in the Perak State Assembly.
Article 72.1 of the Federal Constitution says "The validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court". Was his bias, partial and arbitrary action comes under the purview of this article?
Once believed there existed a body of ideal rules against which man-made laws including parliamentary enactments and decisions could be tested. These were described as natural law, natural justice or equity – thought to be of divine origin.
The rights of a person to be tried by an impartial judge and to be heard in his defence –were thought to be fundamental elements of this divine, unchangeable order. Coke CJ in DR.Bonham’s case (1610) said: Even an Act of Parliament could be declared invalid by the courts if it offended “common right and reason” by making a man judge in his own cause. A century later in DR. Bentley’s case (1723) –court pointed out that even God himself did not pass sentence upon Adam before he was called to make his defence. Later –when things became more secular the notion of procedural fairness was already deeply rooted –its procedural requirements –remained something which the superior courts assumed should be complied with by interior bodies entrusted with judicial and now quasi-judicial bodies.
We all know a mule's mother is a horse and the father a donkey.