Will There Be D-Day For Selangor And Pakatan?

Hantu Laut

 As I have said in my recent post "Khalid Samad Outrage, Is the Royal Institution Under Threat?" there  seemed to be immense fear among Pakatan leaders that the Sultan may agree to a dissolution of the state assembly to resolve the Selangor impasse.

The regularly-cited constitutional expert Prof Dr Abdul Aziz Bari is a partisan pro-Pakatan supporter. Almost all of his prognoses in the past had been approbation of Pakatan Rakyat and antagonism of the ruling party.  Story here.

A question I would like to ask our learned professor how he arrived at his own logic that Khalid is a caretaker menteri besar? As far as the constitution is concerned a government only become a caretaker  after dissolution of the assembly and until such time the same or new government is installed, in most cases after completion of polling and the winner with a clear majority is established. In Khalid's case his government is still a going concern as there was no dissolution of the assembly yet.

For all intents and purposes Khalid Ibrahim is still the legitimate menteri besar accorded him under the Selangor constitution until such time a vote of no confidence is brought against him in the legislative assembly, or substantive evidence is presented to the Sultan that Khalid had lost majority support of members of the assembly. Until then Khalid is not a caretaker menteri besar. 

If he so wish, the Sultan can demand all 56 of the assemblymen to be present in front of him for him to determine the lost of confidence in Khalid Ibrahim, or the Sultan can ignore all that and allow dissolution of the assembly.

These Pakatan folks are one of a kind, they can without a flicker of guilt, right what is wrong and wrong what is right.

Remember the Perak debacle? How they wanted a snap poll after they lost the government to BN. How they ridiculed and harassed the Sultan of Perak and brought him into public odium and contempt.

The whole episode started when Pakatan inticed BN Nasaruddin Hashim to crossover to Pakatan. Even though they had formed the government in Perak, they were foolish enough to go on a wild hunt to steal BN assemblyman. 

Anwar, as always, the lousy chess player was outwitted by the wily foxes in BN, who not only succeeded in getting Nasaruddin back to BN, but brought along with him three Pakatan assemblymen. The departure of the three caused the collapse of the Pakatan government in Perak. 

Obviously, the Perak's mess had not taught Anwar a lesson. 

What the Sultan and majority of Malaysians know of Khalid's ouster and lost of confidence had been through the media, pro-Pakatan news portals blogs and directly from the Pakatan secretariat. The Sultan have not had an audience with Pakatan leaders yet to determine Khalid's fate.

Some Pakatan leaders and pro-Pakatan news portal/blogs are already having a field day pouring scorn on the Sultan even before he decides on the issue.

Initially,  PAS sided with Khalid and refused to accept Wan Azizah as replacement for Khalid, but after being lampooned by PKR and DAP,  bowed to the wishes of Anwar, PKR and DAP to put only Anwar's wife as  sole candidate for menteri besar, hoping to corner the Sultan into submission, leaving him no choice but to accept Wan Azizah. 

Article 53 (2) a..... gives the Sultan absolute and unfettered power to decide according to his judgement.The Sultan may or may not accept Wan Azizah.
  
Would Anwar accept if the Sultan rejected his wife and asked for new names to be submitted to him, or would he organise a street's party to seek justice?

Will there be dissolution day for Selangor and Pakatan?

Shameful! Hadi Awang Should Resign Or Take PAS Out Of Pakatan!

Hantu Laut

Panas-panas tahi ayam! is a Malay idiom, which literally means as hot as the chicken shit that fizzles out very fast.

PAS President Hadi Awang has lost his mojo, the party decision sabotaged and reversed!

Read more below:

This has made PAS look really silly and like a party with no principles. First it says it wants Khalid retained as MB. Then it abandons Khalid and proposes two names as possible replacements. Finally, it goes for just one name.

I really don't care whatever happened to Khalid, it's water under the bridge, that's no more the issue.

The pertinent question now is, can PAS be trusted ?

A man is only good as his word. PAS is now the biggest laughing stock for the entire world to see.

If Hadi Awang had any more self-respect left in him, he should resign as president, or take PAS out of Pakatan.

Tony Pua: Khalid Ibrahim Extremely Honest And Hardworking Menteri Besar

Hantu Laut

The speech was made by Tony Pua on 5 Feb 2014 praising MB Khalid Ibrahim as being an honest and hardworking menteri besar.



Within a matter of months Khalid Ibrahim has turned from honest-to-goodness Mr Clean to a devious double-dealing Mr Crooked.

Mr Pua, what happened to your outstanding ovation for Khalid Ibrahim?

Poor guy, someone must have squeezed his balls to toe the party line .

Anwar Screw-Up Big Time, Is Fresh Elections In The Offing?

Hantu Laut

Is fresh election in the offing for Selangor?

Anwar Ibrahim has cut his nose to spite his face and had thrown Selangor into political turmoil that may see PR (Pakatan Rakyat) road to Putrajaya going up in smoke.

This man whom I have rejected as a leader since his days in UMNO has shown vacuousness of his highly questionable power grab that backfiring not only on himself but on the whole Pakatan Rakyat, which may see the demise of the three-party coalition.

Every step taken by Anwar and PKR against Khalid Ibrahim has been in the wrong direction. 

Anwar demanded that Khalid resigned to pave way for his wife to take over the MB position as Khalid was appointed by Pakatan Rakyat. For those with moral principle, this is nepotism of the highest order. Are there not enough qualified candidates in the PKR elected representatives line-up to become MB? 

Why his wife? 

Why not the wolfish Azmin Ali, who had been played out twice of the MB post by him.A promise he made to Azmin, but couldn't deliver because the other two partners PAS and DAP were not comfortable with Azmin.

We can rule out Azmin due to his unacceptability, which leaves PKR with 12 more choices. Are the Muslims among the 12 all dumb? If it's true no one in PKR is capable other than his wife why not pick someone from PAS to replace Khalid, as the MB post rightfully belong to PAS, which they sacrificed to PKR for peace sake.

This is where stupidity reigned over sensibility, Anwar caught with his pants down as exposed by his little boy wonder Rafizi Ramli that PAS was never consulted on the "Kajang Move" as PAS is not likely to agree. What's the point of a coalition if you don't trust your partner and do things on the sly?

Like morning dreams come true, PAS dissented saying Khalid has not done anything wrong to justify his removal. 

Anwar claimed that Khalid was appointed by PR, therefore, must abide by the decision, again this conniving otter made another big mistake.

Was there unanimous decision? 

It is now clear there wasn't any consensus at all. The God-fearing leaders in PAS have no time for Anwar's greed and connivance. PAS has also identified who are the moles in PAS, planted by Anwar to help further his ambition to become PM (Prime Minister) of this country, by hook or by crook.

By what transpired lately, PAS appears to have gotten fed up with the constant bullying by PKR and DAP and is prepared to leave the coalition if Anwar proceeded with the removal of Khalid and replaced with his wife.

PAS has no objection to other names, but Anwar appears not keen and insistent in putting his wife.

PKR has stripped Khalid of his membership making him an MB without a party and PAS showing its displeasure with Anwar by inviting Khalid to join PAS.

PAS has thrown a spanner in the works and not likely to change its stance.

With Khalid out, PKR is now left with 13 ADUNs and if Khalid join PAS the likelihood of PAS demanding the MB to come from PAS is highly probable.

Khalid may go for broke. A dissolution of the assembly and fresh elections is even of higher probability.

I have said many times before that this coalition of strange bedfellows will one day disintegrate because they have nothing in common other than dreaming of taking over Putrajaya, which will also end up in chaos as PAS is not comfortable with Anwar as PM as revealed by little boy wonder Rafizi Ramli, the so-called architect of the "Kajang Move". 

As they say "never send a boy to do a man's job"  

Anwar has stripped himself naked of his true colours. This is his biggest blunder. I expect many of his faithful supporters would have seen through the smoke screen and will shy away from him.

Anwar will soon be a liability to Pakatan Rakyat.

Khalid Ibrahim will eventually have to go, but not before he inflicts more serious damage on Anwar's reputation. 

There is a Chinese idioms that says "greed over small gains brings big losses"

Anwar screw-up big time.

Anwar Ibrahim A Bad Chess Player, Checkmated By Khalid.

Hantu Laut

Anwar Ibrahim is a poor chess player compared to Khalid Ibrahim, who checkmated him of his insatiable desire to kick out Khalid and make his wife Wan Azizah as the Menteri Besar of Selangor. 

Strange as it may sound, PKR had also issued Khalid with a show cause letter, which stated among other things the following.

The letter dated 5 August 2014 sates that Khalid had, by way of a press statement on 22 July 2014, defied the decision of the Majlis Pimpinan Pusat (Central Leadership Committee) to put forward Dr Wan Azizah as the MB (Menteri Besar) of Selangor.

What's the point of a show cause letter from the party when the MB position comes under the purview of the state legislative assembly and only members of the the house with consent of the Sultan can remove Khalid as MB.

Even if PKR sack Khalid from the party, but he still enjoys majority support of the house, he can still legally continue as MB.

A simple majority can oust Khalid. The house has 56 seats, Pakatan needs minimum of 28 ayes have it, to remove Khalid. PAS with 15 seats in the assembly refused to give assent to the removal of Khalid to be replaced by Anwar's wife Wan Azizah. PAS leaders are convinced Khalid has done nothing wrong and see Anwar's desire to put his wife as the MB an immoral act.

It is obvious Anwar can't get enough lawmakers to support him in a vote of no confidence against Khalid and is now resorting to dirty Nazi type tactic of hounding Khalid by disseminating false propaganda and spurious character assassination about Khalid's wrongdoings to mislead the Selangor people.

Looks like little boy wonder Rafizi Ramli's "Kajang Move" has turned sour and has turned docile Khalid into a badass. Little boy wonder thinks Khalid can be bullied into submission. How wrong can he and Anwar be!

Khalid stood firm because he has enough lawmakers behind him in the event of a showdown and also hold the trump card in the event of anticipated foul-up in the house, last resort...... a dissolution.

I hope PAS stood steadfastly against the onslaught of bullying from PKR and DAP and stood by their principle.

Khalid has made a good menteri besar and no reason to replace him.

Anwar is a dangerous man and should never be allowed to always have his ways.

Question For The Lawyers: Letter Of The Law or Spirit Of The Law ?

Hantu Laut

The United Kingdom has no codified constitution.Much of the British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments and treaties and in other unwritten sources such as, constitutional convention and royal prerogatives.

Unlike Malaysia and most other countries of the world the U.K has no written constitution. She ran by convention. In layman's term it means " a way in which something is usually done".

Can we say the U.K has no constitution whatsoever?

Here, a lawyer, a so called constitutional expert and a member of the Bar Council and who has probably wasted a couple of years at law school says Malaysia has no official religion because the word "official" is missing from Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution in which Islam was prescribed as the state's religion.

Article 3 of the Malaysian constitution, should it be "letter of the law or spirit of the law"? A question for the legal fraternity.

Are lawyers trained to differentiate between the two or were just taught to parrot everything they learned from the law book.

On the other hand, we have dummies who says the prime minister of Malaysia must be a Muslim and a Malay.These dummies probably do not have a copy or have never seen a copy of the Malaysian constitution, let alone read it, but got enough balls to go to the press and say their piece.

Malaysia has a written constitution.We are not governed by convention.Just because historically we had only Malay/Muslim prime ministers it does not mean that is the law of the land.Person of any faith can become prime minister if he enjoyed majority support in Parliament.However, such anomaly is not likely to happen in the near future.

Of course, there are smart lawyers and and not so smart lawyers.

They say, smart lawyers go into private practice and make lots of money and the not so smart lawyers joined politics and make even more money than the smart lawyers.The worst of the lot are bad lawyers, those pretty useless ones in private practice, wanting to keep up with the Joneses but can ill afford it, next thing you know they were doing shady deals and some would run away with their client's money.

So, not all lawyers are smart.

Abraham Lincoln, a self-educated man, who became a lawyer and went on to become the 16th President of the United States said in one of his famous speeches "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt"

Malaysia State Constitutional Crisis

Hantu Laut

This article is flawed.At the time Sultan Azlan Shah decided to give the state to the BN there were 31 state assemblymen present and indicated their support of the BN and Zambri as MB in the presence of the Sultan.It was not 28-28 as mentioned.Nizar ceased to be MB the moment he lost majority support of members of the house.

Asia Sentinel

Written by Our Correspondent

Tuesday, 09 February 2010

Any indication that Malaysia's courts were becoming independent of the government disappeared from view again Tuesday when the five-member Federal Court ruled that United Malays National Organization stalwart Zambry Abdul Kadir is the rightful chief minister of the state of Perak, the country's second biggest and one of its richest. The state has been caught a constitutional crisis since May of 2009, with the government paralyzed by the controversy over who was actually in charge. Perak had been controlled by the national opposition coalition Pakatan Rakyat as a result of the March 2008 national election, with Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as chief minister. However, then-Deputy Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak engineered the defection of three lawmakers, bringing the government to a halt in a 28-28 tie. Upon their defection, Sultan Raja Azlan Shah immediately ordered Nizar to vacate his position and installed Zambry in his place. That kicked off a melee in which 65 people were arrested. Ahead of Tuesday's decision, Rais yatim, the the Information Communication and Culture Minister Datuk Seri Dr Rais Yatim, was quoted by the state-owned national wire service Bernama as calling on the people to be calm. "We should respect the decision irrespective of whether it favors A or B. We are confident in our judicial system and in the way the law is administered," Bernama quoted him as saying. "The mood is somber," said a Malay woman in Ipoh, the state capital. "I think people are going to just have to wait for the general election," which is probably three years away. "The feeling is that the verdict about Nizar and Zambry was decided a long time ago." Kuala Lumpur High Court Judge Abdul Aziz Rahim ruled on May 11 that the sultan lacked the authority to remove Nizar without a vote of confidence in the statehouse, only to have the appellate court put his decision in abeyance a few hours later. The case – and the Perak state government – have been stalled as the Federal Court, the country's highest, took up the decision in November and has chewed on it ever since. The ruling, led by Court of Appeal president Alauddin Mohd Sheriff, was built on the premise that the Barisan Nasional, or ruling national coalition, controls 31 votes in the Perak statehouse although no vote has ever been taken, and while the three defectors are said to be leaning towards the Barisan, they have given no official indication that they would cross the aisle. The Election Commission refused a letter proclaiming the realignment of their loyalty, setting the stage for the constitutional crisis. When Nizar refused to go, instead of waiting for Judge Abdul Aziz's original ruling, elite federal Field Reserve Unit police invaded the statehouse on May 7 to drag opposition Speaker V. Sivakumar out of the chambers amid flying furniture and protests that resulted in the arrest of 65 people. As far as can be determined, it is the first time in Malaysian history that federal police had ever entered a legislature. The ruling appears unlikely to end the continuing political uncertainty in either Perak or the government. Political analysts in Kuala Lumpur say the logical solution to the stalemate – a state popular by-election to determine the makeup of the statehouse – is unlikely because Najib and the Barisan do not believe they could win it. The state, long a tin mining center, has an extremely large Chinese and Indian population and the Chinese have largely abandoned the Barisan because of the collapse into scandal of the Malaysian Chinese Association, which is embroiled in infighting over the disappearance of billions of dollars in the attempt to turn Port Klang, 60 km. west of Kuala Lumpur, into a multimodal port. The Barisan instead appears to be counting on time to bring the voters, particularly disaffected ethnic Malays who have abandoned UMNO for the fundamentalist Parti Islam se-Malaysia and Anwar Ibrahim's Parti Keadilan Rakyat, or People's Justice Party, because of a long series of scandals and outright crimes. However, Anwar is on trial in Kuala Lumpur in what has been widely billed as Sodomy 2, on charges of sodomizing a former aide in a trial that to everybody but the government itself appears to be built on dubious allegations that were laid to derail the first realistic challenge to the ruling national coalition since the country was formed. In the meantime, his party is beset by infighting in several state assemblies, particularly Penang and Selangor, with a growing number of restive lawmakers threatening to leave the opposition coalition and return to the Barisan. Three have been brought before a disciplinary committee of the opposition coalition seeking answers to questions over their use of personal expense accounts. The coalition that Anwar cobbled together has been an unlikely one from the start, with the Islamic, largely rural and fundamentalist PAS on one side and the ethnic Chinese Democratic Action Party on the other, with Anwar's moderate, urban Malays in the middle. Zulkifli Nordin, a member of Anwar's Parti Keadilan Rakyat, was quoted publicly earlier this week as predicting mass resignations over the next two to three weeks over tensions with the DAP and PKR's difficulty in dealing with them. "The problem was that Anwar rounded up a bunch of incompetents to run in 2008, and disillusionment was so great with UMNO that a lot of people got voted into office who should never have been voted into office," said a businessman in Kuala Lumpur. The opposition coalition, he said, has thus never been able to capitalize on its gains by actually paying attention to governing. At the same time, the opposition has been harried by Najib's use of law enforcement powers including the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and others to bring opposition lawmakers in on charges that many observers believe are superfluous. Nonetheless, the court's decision appears certain to reinforce popular opinion that Malaysia's judiciary is thoroughly in the pockets of UMNO. That isn't helped by the case against Anwar, who is charged with having consensual sex with the former aide, a charge that is extremely rare in Malaysia and especially Kuala Lumpur, where gay bars abound and homosexuality isn't particularly condemned despite the fact that it is nominally against the law. An examination of the evidence against him in similar charges in 1998 leads to the overwhelming conclusion that it was concocted to derail his political career. The case has been put on temporary hold as Anwar's lead counsel, Karpal Singh, seeks to disqualify the presiding judge, Mohd Zabidin Mohd Diah.

Rocky's Bru's 'Is It Constitutional, Sir?':Groping In The Dark

Hantu Laut

Rocky Bru posted an article 'Is It Constitutional, Sir?' regarding scholarship mooted by the Prime Minister to be given based on meritocracy to anyone irrespective of race. Rocky also highlighted a pro-UMNO blogger's concern that what the Prime Minister is trying to do could be unconstitutional and he should have sought the Malay rulers views and consent before making public the issue.

The blogger calling his blog 'The Thirteen Million Plus Ringgit' did not quote the relevant article in the Constitution that spelled that government scholarships can only be given to Malays.

Can't make everybody happy, isn't it ? If he tries to please the non-Malays, the Malays complained and if he tries to keep everything for the Malays, the Chinese and Indians complained.Tough job to be prime minister.

The some extent the blogger is quite right in his assumption but no right enough to make it unconstitutional.

This particular aspect of the Federal Constitution gave the Yang Dipertuan Agong, not all the Malay rulers, the responsibility and power to safeguard the special position of, not only the Malays, but also the natives of Sabah and Sarawak.The said article also covers quotas for public services, permits and licences for bumiputras.

There is no fixed quota or exclusivity expressed in the article. The proportion of scholarship is left at the discretion of the Yang Dipertuan Agong.

The relevant article is Article 153 of the Federal Constitution.The article under 153(8) and (9) also gave protection to others from being unfairly treated by virtue of its provision.

Najib needs only to seek the Agong's consent to proceed with his proposal. The Malays should not worry of losing out as I suspect this could be a parallel scheme which would benefit the Malays too as there would be more scholarships available for smart Malays.

Big Dog, the blogger, if I assumed his name correctly, did not bother to read the relevant article to its full extent or didn't read it at all. His article is here.

Maybe, it's time the Malays give the PM a helping hand instead of crying for help all the times.

Watching The Lord of the Rings in Tehran

By A TIME Reporter in Tehran Wednesday, Jun. 24, 2009

Left, Elijah Wood in a scene from The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

On June 23, Iranian security forces, reportedly using live ammunition, clashed with protesters numbering in the hundreds in the area of the country's parliament in Tehran. At the same time, there were indications that a behind-the-scenes struggle was intensifying in the corridors of power even as the government continued its campaign to quiet the populace through propaganda and entertainment. A resident of the capital, who asked for anonymity, sent TIME the following report:

In normal times, Iranian television usually treats its viewers to one or two Hollywood or European movie nights a week. But these are not normal times, so it's been two or three such movies a day. It's part of the push to keep people at home and off the streets, to keep us busy, to get us out of the regime's hair. The message is "Don't worry, be happy." Channel Two is putting on a Lord of the Rings marathon as part of the government's efforts to restore peace.

Lots of people, adults and kids, are watching in the room with me. On the screen, Gandalf the Grey returns to the Fellowship as Gandalf the White. He casts a blinding white light, his face hidden behind a halo. Someone blurts out, "Imam zaman e?!" (Is it the Imam?!) It is a reference, of course, to the white-bearded Ayatullah Khomeini, who is respectfully called Imam Khomeini. But "Imam" is at the same time a title of the Mahdi, a messianic figure that Muslims believe will come to save true believers from powerful evildoers at the time of the apocalypse. Isn't that our predicament?

I wonder which official picked this film, starting to suspect, even hope, that there is a subversive soul manning the controls at seda va sima, central broadcasting. It is way too easy to find political meaning in the film, to draw comparisons to what is happening in real life. There are themes that seem to allude to Mir-Hossein Mousavi, the candidate President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claims to have defeated: the unwanted quest and the risking of life in pursuit of an unanticipated destiny. Could he be Boromir, the imperfect warrior who is heroic at the end, dying to defend humanity? Didn't Mousavi talk about being ready for martyrdom? (See pictures of Neda Agha-Soltan, the Iranian opposition's martyr of choice.)

And listen: there is the sly reference to Ahmadinejad. Iranian films are dubbed very expertly. So listen to the Farsi word they use for hobbit and dwarf: kootoole, little person. Kootoole, of course, was and is the term used in many of the chants out on the street against the diminutive President.

In the eye of the beholder in Tehran, the movie is transformed into an Iranian epic. When Gandalf's white steed strides into the frame, local viewers see Rakhsh, the mythical horse of the Rostam, the great champion of the Shahnameh, the thousand-year-old national epic. "Bah, bah ... Rakhsh! Rakhsham amad!" someone says in awe.

At the moment, the ancient Treebeard bears Pippin through the forest, and the hobbit asks, "And whose side are you on?" Those of us watching already know the answer: Mousavi! Treebeard is decked in green, after all.

That's as much as we can see of an opposition viewpoint on TV. The news has a droning sameness, the official message being "politics is a nasty business, but now it's over." At least nothing is really being hidden anymore. Except for that first night, Saturday the 20th of June, the broadcasts have not shied away from the violence. But they've found a way to turn it inside out, make it about the protesters and not what has happened. When they want to make a point, they lay it on, 10 minutes, sometimes close to 15. As a friend says, "This is not news. It's interpretation." (Read about the opposition's options in Iran.)

TV reporters interview regular folk on the streets and in the parks for very much the same sound bites. Khastekonande, says one person, describing the protests as "getting old." Says another: "I'm a businessman. For my business to succeed, I need for there to be calm." "We just wanna make some bread, take care of our lives and our business." "The ones who are rioting aren't of the people. I don't think that they're part of the people." "It's been several days that I haven't been able to bring my son and daughter to the park because of the violence." And so on. (See pictures of the turbulent aftermath of Iran's presidential election.)

And so we're glued to the trilogy. We are riveted. A child in the room loudly predicts that Lord of the Rings will put an end to the nightly shouts, that people will not take to the rooftops and windows because this film will keep them occupied. Besides, there is a worrisome rumor going around that the Basij are marking the doorways of those households that continue to call out "Allah Akbar!" at night, a reverse Passover.

The child goes on to report that the kids on his school "service" (the long Toyota vans that act as school buses for Tehran's students) have been chanting, "Pas rai e ma koojast?! Pas rai e ma koojast?!" (Then where is our vote?! Then where is our vote?!) I ask what the driver is doing while all this goes on and the kid tells me that the driver honks along. Honk honk-honk-honk! Pas rai e ma koojast?! Honk honk-honk-honk!

But the child is wrong about the evening shouts. Suddenly they begin, as a low roll from the park. Then they quickly build upward. "Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!" No way. We rush to the window. They have continued night after night, beginning at 10 and continuing for 30 minutes. Each time I've lost faith, I've been wrong. Iranians are proving to be a sturdier lot than I have given them credit for, much mightier even than the formidable kootoole who stand in their way.Read more..

Should The Sultan Prorogue The Perak State Assembly ?

Hantu Laut

There seems to be no end in sight to the Perak crisis.The situation had gotten worse by the diverse interpretations and misinterpretations of the constitution.The latest cooking of the broth was one by Tommy Thomas, so-called constitutional expert and one of the counsels for the insolent Sivakumar. Are there lawyers who actually specialised in constitutional law in this country or just another one of those general practitioners?

A check on Tommy Thomas revealed he had been charged for contempt of court.The judgement of the Court Of Appeal is here.Those in Pakatan seem to court lawyers that have little respect for our judicial system.Those that make derogatory statements against the judiciary if judgement made were not in their favour.

The crisis in Perak is exacerbated mostly by lawyers or so-called legal minds giving their own interpretations of the law.The monarch, the judicial system and the powers that be have all been mauled and mercilessly dragged in the mud. Dialectic is gone and dead, replaced by act of confrontation and civil society that have gone bonkers with defiance and incivility. Even an ex-ISA detainee that has been released recently showed continued defiance and little respect for the law threatening the government to show his displeasure by going to the streets with thousands of his supporters. A wannabe hero the likes of Ghandi and Mendela except he is a ruffian and a troublemaker rather than a man of conscience, obviously seeking fame on the wrong platform.

The Perak crisis will not go away and if there is not going to be a dissolution soon the only possible solution is for the Sultan to prorogue the state assembly under Article 36.2 of the constitution until the court clear all the cases.The sitting menteri besar can seek the Sultan's indulgence for prorogation of the assembly with a time frame.

To be fair to both sides the court must show expediency to dispose off the cases as quickly as possible and whatever the judgement was both sides must show respect.

The Perak case have some similarity with the 2008-2209 Canadian political dispute where oppositions parties in the House of Commons planned to pass a vote of no confidence against the minority government formed by the Conservative Party only six weeks after a general elections.Prime Minister Stephen Harper requested the Governor-General to prorogue parliament thereby delaying a possible change in government. Dissolution was not considered as the Governor-General felt to put the Canadian people through an election before six months would have been irresponsible.

It has been slightly over a year since the general elections. Whether it is fair to drag the Perakians to the polls again would be a matter of interpretation.

Just an idea.

School Yard Politics

(A comment from one of my commentators which I think deserves a place on the main page of this blog rather than placed obscurely in the comment box.A rather refreshing and fair analysis of the crisis in Perak)

by eddy:

Whatever the morality of leapfrogging is, in reality, leapfrogging whether good or bad is not against the law and is part of the democratic process whether we like it or not. Pakatan Supreme Leader Anwar Ibrahim is chief instigator in this leapfrogging business and Pakatan have never complained in fact welcome leapfrogs with wide open arms.

What is undemocratic is when Pakatan lost their tenuous 3 seats majority in Perak DUN, they immediately want a change to the rules of the game and wants to force a dissolution and another snap election. To further pervert the democratic process the former DAP Speaker illegally suspended Zambry and his 6 excos and declared the 3 leapfrog seats vacant to cancel the majority that BN now have.

Politics are for grown and matured man and woman, and the way I see it Pakatan style of politics belongs in the schoolyard complete with you are with me or be damned attitude. If Pakatan politicians wants to behave like school ruffians when faced with a legitimate political takeover by BN, then they have no business to be in politics. Do not stay in the kitchen if you cannot stand the heat.

In March 2008 elections the BN has 28 seats, DAP 18 seats, PKR 7 seats and PAS 6 seats. BN at that time asked for a dissolution and another snap election because there is no clear majority BUT the DYMM Sultan Perak in his wisdom refused BN's request and give confidence to the loose DAP,PAS and PKR parties the right to govern the state.

So, BN being a matured and gentleman coalition accepted the DYMM Sultan's command without having to "sembah derhaka" like what that insolent and stubborn Nizar is doing now when his Pakatan is in the clear minority.

I think the democratic process must be allowed to run through its course and that the BN with 31 seats now has clear majority be allowed without hindrance to administer the state of Perak.

The High Court ruling the other day has paved the way for BN to right a mistake of not calling for a DUN to move a motion of no confidence against Nizar and sack him as MB, clearly in a democratic process the minority must accede to the majority not pervert it by using a demented speaker to suspend nine(9) ADUNS on the BN side to give an unholy majority to the Pakatan in the DUN. In a democracy we cannot have a situation where tyranny of the minority is allowed to fester and destroy democratic rule in Malaysia.

I support that no snap elections should be allowed just to please the sore losers of the Pakatan pack, Nizar and his ADUNS has to back down and respect the majority wishes and a emergency DUN be convened ASAP to sack incendiary Nizar and his Pakatan Government and let the rights of the majority be uphold.

As a note there is an interesting insight from a blogger when he said that if the minority in Perak can ask and get consent for a dissolution of the DUN, then is it not possible that Anwar Ibrahim as opposition leader seek to see the DYMM Agung and say he has majority in 5 states and 82 MPs in parliament and try to convince the Agung to dissolve parliament because he thinks he can win a snap election if called now....just a scary thought. But then until this year, who in Malaysia would think that Nizar would sembah derhaka and refuse to resign even when the DYMM Sultan has appointed Zambry as MB, anything could happen nowadays.

Who Stoke Racial Tension ? Ask 'Incendiary Nizar' And Malaysian Insider

Hantu Laut

The Malaysian Insider wrote that Nizar remains the man of the hour and did not disappoint the crowd.He stole the limelight from Anwar Ibrahim.Well, it's all a matter of opinion.If the guy who wrote the article thinks so, that's merely his opinion.

Nizar has not failed to amaze me with his rhetoric and duplicity. His statement that “Umno tells people: ‘Our closest enemies are the Chinese’,” is clearly a tactic he invented himself to pit the Chinese against UMNO. Although, there may be some individuals in UMNO who might have gone overboard and utter such racist remarks but for Nizar to make it sounds like it is the party ideology and policy is dangerous, can cause racial tension and an unfair allegation. It's about time this sore loser act responsibly and not make statement that can stoke racial tension and disharmony among the people.He also accused UMNO of complicity in the May 13 incident.

Do we have to be reminded of this tragic date every time it comes around ? What benefits would it bring? Do we have to conduct a survey among the young unbeknownst about what they think of it as was done by Malaysian Insider? I just couldn't see the benefits of such exercise. The incident would be better left in the history book.

It makes one wonder who were actually the culprits that stoke racial tension ? There were no racial tension before the emergence of Pakatan, Sure, there must have been some unhappy Chinese and Indians but they were in the minority. You certainly can't please everyone. Most were quite happy going around minding their own business and couldn't be bothered with politics.

Polarisation of the people actually started in the pre-March 2008 General Elections and have gotten worse by the oppositions constant reminder to the Chinese and Indians that they were different and have been treated differently by the BN government.This ugly method of fishing for votes of the Chinese and Indians shows that those in Pakatan couldn't care less about the breakdown of racial and religious harmony as long as they can capture power.The end justifies the mean.

Their culture of dividing the races, act of defiance and contempt of the court of law can be seen in the recent sitting of the Perak State Assembly where the speaker refused to vacate his seat in spite of the fact that he was politely asked to do so after being voted out. They mocked and humiliate the judiciary as if the whole judicial system is rotten and refused to respect judgement handed down by the court.

Malaysian Insider ultimate accolade of Nizar here.

Perak Should Consider A Caretaker Menteri Besar/Government

Hantu Laut

Nizar is again in defiance, from saying he respects the Court of Appeal decision he has now made about-turn and insisted he is the lawful MB and should be in office, probably after listening to advices from the constitutional experts in DAP.

One of his state executive councillors Thomas Su said that while PR accepted the decision of the Court of Appeal, they were unsure as to what it really meant.

His counsel Leong Cheok Keng said "The High Court ruling was not an order to act which can be stopped by staying it. It is not like paying damages where you can halt the payment until a decision has been made," explained Leong.

Mister Leong is a lawyer. It may have escaped his mind that the Court of Appeal is a higher court.The course of justice can only be exhausted at the highest level, the Federal Court.

Surprisingly, all these interpretations came from so-called learned people who are well-versed in the laws of the land but prefer to juggle and muddle it to suit their own agenda.

It is very clear what 'stay of execution' is all about, that the 'status quo' remains until the case is heard and disposed off.Nizar's lawyer should know that he can apply to put aside the 'stay' but instead prefers to confuse the matter for public consumption and gain points in the court of public opinion.

Whether the court will agree or not is a different matter.As I have said in my earlier posting there will be suits and counter suits and all these will not resolve the problem other than making it worse.

The crisis in Perak has turned into a high-flying trapeze and showcase the most shameful act of greed for power, humiliation of the constitution and disrespect of the powers of the Sultan.

The Sultan is in a situation of 'fait accompli' where what he has done can't be undone.Insisting on a dissolution is again showing disrespect to his rights under the Constitution.Both parties should find other solution to resolve the impasse.

Both Pakatan and BN should put aside their differences and cease all legal tussles and any further power grab. Both Nizar and Zambry should cease to be menteri besar. A lawmaker from among them whom both sides are comfortable with should be made as caretaker menteri besar until an amicable solution is found. The caretaker menteri besar will choose among them equal number of lawmakers from both sides to form his exco. To ensure independence and impartiality the lawmaker nominated to be menteri besar should resign from his party.

Perak can take a leaf out of Sabah history book.

In 1965, the political feud between the late Tun Mustapha and the late Tun Fuad Stephens (formerly Donald Stephens) for the Sabah chief ministership was resolved with the appointment of Peter Lo as caretaker chief minister. Peter Lo, from the minority party SCA ( Sabah Chinese Association), a coalition member of the Sabah Alliance served from 1965 to 1967 until the crisis was resolved and Mustapha took over as chief minister.

The crisis in Perak has become a political turmoil causing disharmony and hatred among the people.

Maybe, it's time to smoke the peace pipe.

Perak Crisis Round 2: Back To Square One

Hantu Laut

As I have said earlier the Perak crisis will enter Round 2.

Today, the Court of Appeal has granted Zambry the BN backed MB a stay of execution and to continue as MB until the case is disposed off.

It's back to square one for Nizar. There will be appeals and counter appeals.The constitutional jugglers and peddlers would continue to spin their own version of the constitution.

Unfortunately, the joy, a flash in the pan, was short-lived for Nizar, Pakatan and their supporters.It's back to spit and sputter for Pakatan supporters on unfair judiciary, political intrigue and a tale of cloak and dagger of the BN government.

Maybe, someone in Pakatan can suggest some street demo and civil disobedience to maintain their political culture of defiance.Well, let's hope they respect the court's decision.

Round 2 will be slow and painful for Pakatan.

Nizar Should Go Back To The Assembly

Hantu Laut

Nizar should go back to the assembly to show that he has the majority support of the members to continue as menteri besar and that Pakatan has control of the house.Then there would be no need for him to ask for dissolution.

A dissolution is not necessary unless there is a stalemate in the assembly.The Regent should ask Nizar to prove his claim that there exists a stalemate. The assembly must reconvene without any members being barred from attending it.

The sacking of the two assemblymen that crossed over to the BN was illegal as the pre-signed undated letter of resignation was considered illegal (a precedence in Sabah) and goes against Article 10 of the Federal Constitution.

The last say is still the Sultan.Dissolution may or may not be granted.

Perak Crisis: Fame And Infamy

Hantu Laut

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.

Ex-Judge Playing Politics

Hantu Laut

He might have been a judge before but he is also a shining example of the proverbial pot calling the kettle black.His summing up of the Perak crisis transcends the true verdict of the Sultan of Perak rights and powers under the Constitution, telling half a story.

I replicate below the relevant articles of the Perak State Constitution:

12. Appointment of Mentri Besar.
(1) His Royal Highness shall appoint by instrument under his
sign manual and State Seal, a Menteri Besar pursuant to paragraph
(a) of Clause 2 of Article 16.
(2) No person shall be appointed to be Mentri Besar unless he is
of the Malay race and professes the Muslim Religion:
Provided that His Royal Highness may in His discretion waive
either or both of the foregoing requirements of this paragraph
relating to race and the Muslim Religion whenever he shall consider
it expedient so to do.

16. The Executive Council.
(1) His Royal Highness shall appoint an Executive Council.
(2) The Executive Council shall be appointed as follows, that
is to say-
(a) His Royal Highness shall first appoint as Mentri Besar to
preside over the Executive Council a member of the Legis-
lative Assembly who in his judgment is likely to command
the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assem-
bly; and

b) he shall on the advice of the Mentri Besar appoint not more
than ten nor less than four other members from among the
members of the Legislative Assembly;
but if an appointment is made while the Legislative Assembly is
dissolved a person who was a member of the Last Legislative Assem-
bly may be appointed but shall not continue to hold office after the
first sitting of the next Legislative Assembly unless he is a member
thereof.

(3) Notwithstanding anything in this Article, a person who is a
citizen by naturalisation or by registration under Article 17 of the
Federal Constitution shall not be appointed Mentri Besar.
(4) In appointing a Mentri Besar, His Royal Highness may, in
his discretion, dispense with any provision in the Constitution of the
State restricting his choice of a Mentri Besar, if in his opinion it is
necessary to do in order to comply with the provisions of this Article.
(5) The Executive Council shall be collectively responsible to the
Legislative Assembly.
(6) If the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the
majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at
his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly,
he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.
(7) Subject to Clause (6) a member of the Executive Council
other than the Mentri Besar shall hold office at His Royal Highness'
pleasure, but any member of the Council may at any time resign his
office.

The relevant articles are 16.2(a) and 16.6 which His Majesty Sultan of Perak has complied with.Article 16.2(a) clearly spelled out that " who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly"

There is nothing in the Constitution that says that the Sultan must meet both parties before he decides who should he appoints as menteri besar as espoused by our learned judge below:

Q: Why do you think the people are angry?

A: Do you know why the Perakians were up in uproar against the Sultan of Perak?

It's because, as any lawyer will tell you, especially as he was Lord President before, that before you make a decision, you cannot see the parties. If you want to meet any of the parties, both of them must be present. You never do so by seeing one and then making a decision. The moment you do that, to the losing side or to any observer will think you have been influenced. So it's the impression that counts.

They were angry with the Sultan because they can sense it in their bones that it is wrong to make a decision to see the other side first.

Sure! the uninitiated men in the streets would be in uproar if too many half-cooked foods are thrown on the streets to feed them.

The Sultan had acted to the letter of the Constitution.To interpret otherwise is mischievous and rousing the rabble.

I must compare what the Sultan did and what I experienced in my many years of doing business.

I used to manage one of the biggest timber exporting companies in this country with markets that span the entire globe from Japan,Korea,the Middle East,Europe and the Americas.

A shipment that takes an entire ship can cost a couple of million ringgit.All the documents and the Bill of Lading would be submitted to the bank to negotiate the L/C (Letter of Credit).As long as all documents are in order and in compliance with the terms and conditions of the L/C the bank would pay you the full sum and get reimbursement from the issuing/reimbursement bank.

The Bill of Lading is the key document to show proof that you have shipped the goods for delivery to the buyer. The bank is only responsible in dealing with documents and not the cargo itself.It is not their business to check whether you have actually shipped the cargo or not or whether the Bill of Lading is genuine or forgery.You can ship a ton of shit as far as you are concerned or not ship anything at all and the bank would still pay you if they deemed your documents are in order.

The same goes with shipping companies.They only deal with carriage of goods and not responsible for what you ship.Take for example plywood in crates or coffee beans in sacks the content of which are not visible.A fly by night or crooked businessman could have loaded broken bricks in the crates and sacks and the shipping company wouldn't have a clue what it is and it is not their responsibility to check the content.They will issue the Bill of Lading and you joyfully go to your bank and get your money.That's why in international business there are a lot of mutual trust and where doubts exist buyer would either send inspectors or surveyors to check and survey the cargo before shipment.

I believe Sultan Azlan Shah has not been wrong in what he did, he deals with the constitution not with emotions and sentiments.

Read the ex-judge full interview here.

Perak On A Roller-Coaster: Bar Council Sucks

Hantu Laut

It will be roller-coaster week for Perak and the drama will continue even after the court have made a decision. Pakatan and its belligerent Speaker will not give up.

If the court do decide in favour of the Sultan's decision and for the BN they will say the judiciary is corrupt and under the control of the executive.The President of the Bar Council Amiga Sreenvasan has imputed that the court would not be fair.

It has now become an interpretation of the law, more on racial sentiments, rather than the letter of the law. The worst culprit is the Bar Council.

Bar Council's vice president Raguneth Kesavan criticised statements made by the Perak police chief promising to take action against anyone who gathers in front of the state assembly building or taking part in an illegal assembly.

This half-past six lawyer said “The police as an enforcement agency must be seen to be neutral. Right now, they are perceived to be anti-Pakatan,”

What exactly is he doing by opening his big mouth? Isn't there a law against illegal assembly? Is he encouraging people to go against the law.Weren't he and his President Amiga Sreenevasan showing bias, anti-government and pro-Pakatan.As professionals why don't they wait for the court to decide the case, be independent like they wanted the police and the judiciary to be, before trying to show their expertise and misled the uninitiated. Looks like the pot calling the kettle black.

Of course the Bar Council can speak out, but in this case , they have shown extreme bias and questioned and interfered with the Sultan of Perak constitutional rights.They all know the Sultan needs not accede to Nizar's request for dissolution as the Sultan deemed he has lost the majority confidence of the assembly yet they insisted it be so.

As a lawyer friend once told me "Free advice is no advice".Unsolicited and free would be of worst value.

This irresponsible lawyer and President of the Bar Council said:

“We are very surprised the police is ignoring the Speaker,”

“Our institutions, that is the courts, the police, et cetera, are being tested and we can judge for ourselves whether they are acting independently or not,”

"There are serious doubts as to whether the police is acting independently,”

She observed that what is going on in the state “shows a total breakdown in relation to the structures and sanctity of the legislature”.

“It shows a violation of the role of the Speaker and an intrusion into the processes of the legislative assembly,”

Firstly, I would like to ask this learned person Amiga whether the law against illegal assembly (protests and demonstrations) has been repelled, suspended or abolished ?

From whom does she expects the police to take order from, the law, the government, Pakatan or the Bar Council?

Secondly, did the Speaker of the Perak Assembly acted in good faith and with impartiality when he suspended the new MB for 18 months and the new Exco members for 12 months and on what ground were they suspended when all the appointments were made by the Sultan? Isn't the Speaker going against the constitutional rights of the Sultan and try to shame him publicly by resorting to foul play to rebel against the Sultan's decision and reinstalled an illegal government?

Maybe, this Amiga person forgot that only majority of the legislature can form the executive, which is exactly what the belligerent speaker is trying to do. Using unscrupulous means to retain power.

If Speakers of state assemblies have the power to decide who the MB should be than all the sultans in Malaysia would become redundant.

BREAKING NEWS

PERAK'S VAGABOND ASSEMBLY

The belligerent Speaker of the Perak assembly has adopted the Indian's fish head curry Penang's style.He convened his assembly under a tree and the assembly have passed a vote of confidence in illegal Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin and seeking dissolution of the assembly.There was no mention how many marionettes attended the wayang kulit.

Pakatan is rearing for a fight and a showdown.We can't see or hear the puppeteer.

Perak state assembly members held an emergency sitting at a vacant lot about 200m from the state secretariat building on Tuesday morning. -Picture by SAIFUL BAHRI/The Star ">

Perak state assembly members passing a motion during the emergency sitting held at a vacant lot about 200m from the state secretariat building on Tuesday morning.

How do you dissolve the assembly if the Sultan doesn't agree.You mean in Pakatan-ruled states the speaker can dissolve the assembly?

NIZAR THE COURT JESTER ?

Ousted Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin is going to the royal court at the palace to entertain the Sultan with his request for dissolution of the Perak State Assembly. The whole idea is to play up the people's emotion and embarrass the Sultan.He knew he would never be allowed into the palace and this is exactly what he and Pakatan wanted and has planned all along.To make the Sultan look bad in the eyes of the people and to rile them up.

Is Perak dicing with emergency rule ?

ASSEMBLY ILLEGAL

Another setback for Nizar and Pakatan.The Ipoh High Court today declared the emergency sitting of the Perak state assembly illegal.It says the speaker has no power to call for sitting of the assembly only the Sultan is authorised to do so under Article 36(1) of the Perak Constitution.

Although, they know they have a weak case and are banging their heads against a brick wall Pakatan will continue to twist and turn the interpretations of the State Constitution to fool the people.They are more interested in the court of public opinion rather than the court of law. The charade will continue.

Antics and Idiocies Of The Perak Crisis

Hantu Laut

Who is the government in Perak? Both Pakatan and BN claimed they are the legitimate governments.We would only know the outcome when the Perak State Assembly convenes.

Pakatan's propaganda to demonise the Sultan has been very successful.Most Malaysians are now convinced the Sultan is at fault with some making unsavoury remarks against him even though it is his prerogative not to dissolve the assembly.How could the Sultan grant dissolution of the assembly upon the advice of a menteri besar who had lost majority support of members of the assembly. Nizar Jamaluddin should have gone to the Sultan earlier when he still has the majority support.My stand has always been that the Sultan is right and his decision should be respected. I believe he will triumph when the case goes to court.

Pakatan's twists and turns on the issue have angered their supporters and bolstered the support for them although their interpretation of the Constitution might not necessarily be the right one.How else can they explain to their supporters other than demonising the Sultan and the BN government.No matter what you tell the hardcore Pakatan's supporters their minds are already carved in stone and blinkered.They are intolerant of opposing views and opinions.There exist in their minds a Utopian society under Anwar Ibrahim and Pakatan.

I certainly do not agree the jumping to BN of the two assemblymen that have been charged for corruption. I think it was a wrong move by BN. As much as we all hate it there are no provisions in the law to stop it. In a democratic system freedom of expression and that of association are paramount. It is only wrong from moral point of view.

I have written a number of articles on the Perak crisis and amazingly the majority of comments I get are in strong support of Pakatan and these are staunch supporters who are completely blinkered.It is not too difficult to guess the outcome of a fresh elections if one is held. Judging from my own 'opinion poll' the BN would be decimated if fresh elections were to be held.

SM, is a regular commentator on my blog and was the most civil among the many that came, some with very outlandish and masochist comments. Below is my response to one of SM comments.

Dear SM,

It's not about having turd brain, it's about respecting the Constitution.The Sultan have the prerogative not to dissolve the assembly.Menteri Besar Nizar should have gone to the Sultan earlier while he still enjoys confidence of majority members of the house.

He went to see the Sultan after BN declared they have the majority.The constitution does not provide allowance for MB to ask for dissolution of the assembly after having lost the majority confidence of the house.That's why the Sultan did not accede to his request.

The Sultan acted in good faith but Anwar Ibrahim and DAP the biggest losers in this tragic reversal of fortune have successfully used the Malays through PAS and PKR to demonise the Sultan.

The problem is no matter how plausible my explanation is, Pakatan supporters and people like you will not agree because you are blinded by Pakatan's propaganda.

Believe me, Pakatan will lose the court case and I already knew what the general consensus among Pakatan's leaders, supporters and people like you.All and sundry will accuse the judges as being biased and corrupted.Bought by the evil BN government.

Let's get your facts correct, why did Mahathir remove the rulers' immunity from prosecution? You probably remember the Sultan of Johor incident.Only after this dreadful incident the BN government went to Parliament to amend the Constitution to remove the rulers' immunity from criminal and civil prosecution.The BN never removed the constitutional powers of the monarchies.These powers are still very intact in the state and federal constitutions.Only the Agong's royal assent to bills passed by Parliament was slightly amended that make the bills automatically the law if the Agong refused to give his royal assent.Whether the same was extended in the state constitutions I am not sure.It could have been included just to be in line with the Federal Constitution

I am sure you don't want the sultans or their families going round killing people or owe the banks money and refused to pay back and get away with it.

Before the amendment they are at liberty to do all that and the law can't touch them.

February 23, 2009 12:24 PM

Below is SM's comment:

HL

Well, then let HRH dissolve the Perak State Assembly & let the people of Perak decide.

Oh wait, HRH & his pals the BN do not want that do they?!
Sorry to say this but you sound very much like Hishammuddin & his bunch of turd brain UNMOputras shouting their support for the Royalty (when we know it was UMNO in the first place that "restricted" the Royalty).
Let the people decide. The people are more powerdul than the Sultan!

February 21, 2009 2:50 PM

It's true the people should decide, but the Sultan have decided first and we should respect his decision.

A Nation Of Inept Lawyers

Hantu Laut

'Law' is a system of rules. Most of us know that.There are many types of law.Let us not get into details. The sheer enormity of the number of laws in existence would put many simpleton like you and me in a state of quandary.That's why we need lawyers to interpret the law or rather the rule of law.That's why you need the services of a lawyer when you are in trouble with the law.They are the experts with the know-how to defend and protect your interests in criminal or civil cases brought against you.

Different lawyers interpret the law differently.That's why you have good lawyers and bad lawyers.Than you have what the Malays called the 'lawyer buruk', people like me who are not trained in law but self-trained in making my own interpretations for the kicks of it.Than at the bottom of the pile you have the trained and seemingly learned 'lawyer buruk' who went to law school and came back none the better and none the wiser. This group would fall into the 'half-past-six' category.

Many of you would have probably heard of Lord Acton, the British historian and politician and one of his famous quotes "Power tends to corrupt, absolute power corrupts absolutely".

The corruptions of power were not only confined to the highest office but exists almost every where in this country, including little flies in many government departments, who become little napoleons with that little power that they may have.Than you have those with unlimited power like the Speaker of the Perak Legislative Assembly who sacked the menteri besar appointed by the Sultan.

Can the speaker use his arbitrary power to suspend those assemblymen for such long period.Is his vast arbitrary power the result of a badly written rules or was it tailored for the British system which we inherited in essence but not in spirit.

The Perak political crisis has attracted multitude of the learned, the half-baked and the buruks, making different interpretations of the law. It has raised more questions than answers.It has created more confusion than revelation of the mechanics of the law.

It is just amazing how diverse and contradictory the legal fraternity can get with their interpretations. Below are some of the comments made by people you would expect to know the subject well. These are professionals. Read them and see whether you came out better informed or more fucked in the head.

1.The Perak Crisis: Two options for Barisan Nasional, say lawyers

2. Suspension of MB, Exco can't be legally challenged: Bar Council

3.Perak speaker erred,

4.The Perak Crisis: Action is treason, says Zahid

5.Bar: Go back to the people

6.Perak Speaker has suspension powers, says legal expert

As Lee Kuan Yew, himself a lawyer, said in one of his New Year's messages many years ago when he was still prime minister that the very bright and intelligent ones go for medicine, engineering and architecture while the not so bright would probably go for law.

Was he trying to be modest or was there truth in his message?