Hantu Laut
Only the dreamers in Pakatan Rakyat including the incorrigible ex menteri besar think they could manipulate the state constitution to their benefits.
My stand have all along been that the Sultan and former Lord President knows more about the constitution than those greedy 'no class' politicians and half-past-six lawyers that gave them false hope that the sultan have erred.
Their dirty campaign against the judiciary have tarnished the reputation and good standing of our judges and brought the nation into disrepute.This bunch of hooligans will never get to see Putrajaya because Malaysians are slowly waking up to seeing their incompetence, greed and amateurism.
What happening in PKR is a reflection of Anwar style of leadership.The Malays are slowly but surely abandoning him and leave him to his own device.
Now, that the highest court in the country has made its final judgment, will the detractors in Pakatan Rakyat continue to disparage the judiciary?Those who did should face the music.
The court should not take anymore nonsense and should slap contempt of court on anyone, bloggers included, who questioned and belittled the court's decision.
Ciao Nizar.Find another job.
Showing posts with label Perak. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Perak. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Thursday, September 3, 2009
Delusion Of Grandeur ?
Hantu Laut
A recalcitrant that hangs on to his whimsical belief that he is still the legitimate speaker of the assembly and that Pakatan is still the government in Perak. He continues to mock the Sultan's constitutional decision.This kind of 'wayang kulit' has become a trademark of Pakatan Rakyat.
Perak is literally under the control of DAP.
Former Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin of PAS was an accidental menteri besar because of requirement under the state constitution that a menteri besar must be a Malay and must be of the Islamic faith. DAP, initiallly, protested but relented after they realised that their coalition partners were both Malay dominated parties and if they don't back down there wouldn't be any DAP government in Perak.However, due to majority members they have in the house they virtually control the menteri besar and the speaker. Without the provision in the constitution no where would the DAP have allowed Nizar to be menteri besar.
His 'tilting at windmills' are not only amusing but is becoming a torn in the flesh. His behaviour has reached quixotic proportion making even the man from La Mancha seems less delusional.
After being disallowed to enter the assembly by the police he decided to go to a hotel for the assembly sitting that he had called for earlier.A quixotic decision was made.
First, under the tree, than in a hotel.Where next ? Mr Speaker?
With 23 other recalcitrants he tries to show the world that he is still the boss and the fate of all the assemblymen are in his hands.
I believe the only civilised way out of this problem is for Pakatan to wait until the next general election to prove that they have the full support of the people of Perak.
I am sure two years from now the people would have grown tired of their 'wayang kulit' and realised what power crazy maniacs they are.
A recalcitrant that hangs on to his whimsical belief that he is still the legitimate speaker of the assembly and that Pakatan is still the government in Perak. He continues to mock the Sultan's constitutional decision.This kind of 'wayang kulit' has become a trademark of Pakatan Rakyat.
Perak is literally under the control of DAP.
Former Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin of PAS was an accidental menteri besar because of requirement under the state constitution that a menteri besar must be a Malay and must be of the Islamic faith. DAP, initiallly, protested but relented after they realised that their coalition partners were both Malay dominated parties and if they don't back down there wouldn't be any DAP government in Perak.However, due to majority members they have in the house they virtually control the menteri besar and the speaker. Without the provision in the constitution no where would the DAP have allowed Nizar to be menteri besar.
His 'tilting at windmills' are not only amusing but is becoming a torn in the flesh. His behaviour has reached quixotic proportion making even the man from La Mancha seems less delusional.
After being disallowed to enter the assembly by the police he decided to go to a hotel for the assembly sitting that he had called for earlier.A quixotic decision was made.
Pakatan assembly orders Ganesan, Hee jailed and fined over May 7 fracas
First, under the tree, than in a hotel.Where next ? Mr Speaker?
With 23 other recalcitrants he tries to show the world that he is still the boss and the fate of all the assemblymen are in his hands.
I believe the only civilised way out of this problem is for Pakatan to wait until the next general election to prove that they have the full support of the people of Perak.
I am sure two years from now the people would have grown tired of their 'wayang kulit' and realised what power crazy maniacs they are.
Monday, August 10, 2009
Biadap, Kurang Ajar Dan Naik Kepala
Hantu Laut
This is an apology to YB Loke Siew Fook who has categorically denied he was the one who posted the offending article against the Sultan of Perak.
Below is an extract from Rocky's Bru:
update: "No, I did not," says Loke.
The YB has left a strong denial in my comment box, which I am reproducing here:-
Sultans are held in higher esteem and are apolitical.Whatever they do in their official functions must be in accordance with their state's constitution and the Sultan of Perak has in all respect abides by the constitution.Pakatan Rakyat in general and DAP in particular have painted a wicked picture of the Sultan to poison the people's mind to fulfil their political agenda.Now they have started insulting the Sultan.
As the Malay saying "dikasi betis nak kepala".In a moment of anger and refusal to accept their lost of power in Perak this bloke from DAP broke the cardinal rule and overstepped the invisible line of civility by insulting the Sultan of Perak and the Regeant.
DAP leaders deliberate obtuseness on the issue and poisoning the people's mind about the Sultan is now going to bite them back. They still could not accept that they have lost the Perak state government. It would be interesting to hear what the leaders in PAS would have to say about their partner's 'kurang ajar' against the Sultan who was only doing his job according to the state constitution which empowered him to make such decision.
Of course Pakatan leaders would say it is not the party's stand but when it comes to members of UMNO making remarks that they don't like they would condemned the whole party and the government.
Below is the 'kurang ajar' article;
The Might Of The Pen
August 6, 2009
NAZRIN OF PERAK PREPARES FOR HIS FINAL JOURNEY TO THE GATES
OF HELL!
Filed under: ARTICLE (LATEST) 06/08/2009, conspiracy, politics — sjsandteam @ 08:47
Tags: NAZRIN OF PERAK PREPARES FOR HIS FINAL JOURNEY TO THE GATES OF HELL!
Kuala Lumpur, Aug 5, 2009: "Democracy does not mean
anything goes. It certainly does not mean mob rule," Nazrin
of Perak said Wednesday night. He said in any functioning
democracy, there were rules as to how society was to be
governed, and in Malaysia, the rules were enshrined in the
country’s constitution. "Our constitution spells out not only
what our rights are but also what the limits to those rights
are. These limits ensure that decisions are not made by those
who wield the most power, shout the loudest or behave in
the crudest manner," he said.
Nazrin who sold the state of Perak to the BN thieves, was
delivering a speech titled "Imbued with Integrity, Endowed
with Ethics: Foundation for Managing Malaysia through
Enlightened Value-Driven Leadership" at the 25th Tunku
Abdul Rahman Lecture organised by the Malaysian Institute
of Management here.
Nazrin of the stolen state of Perak said: "If we seek to settle disputes through mob rule and
lawlessness, our disputes will never be settled." "Precisely because we have so much riding on the
judiciary, it is vitally important that there is judicial independence and impartiality. Without them,
the rule of law cannot prevail. And when the rule of law has become unhinged, it must be fully
restored," said the know-all Nazrin of Perak. He said since the country’s last general election in
March last year, political contestation has become more common and more intense, and this is
likely to continue for some time to come. "But whatever our differences, our overriding concern
must be to create the type of nation we can all be proud of. We must never turn our grand positive
sum nation-building endeavour into a fractious and destructive zero sum one. "We have a good
system of governance in place that has served us well and Malaysians should seek to improve on
1 of 9
and strengthen this system."
Nazrin of Perak said: "Wherever there are weaknesses, we should acknowledge them and strive to
overcome them." He said the Malay rulers are above partisan politics, and this is what a
constitutional monarchy means and what the rulers assiduously believe. "For until and unless
rulers are placed above everyday politics – and the controversies that will inevitably follow – they
will be unable to carry out their constitutional functions properly. These functions are necessary
for the operation of democracy in this country," he said.
Nazrin in trying to protect his ass said the present situation
in Perak stemmed from a political problem, that of political
crossovers, "but was very quickly compounded by other
decisions and actions of questionable legality.""By the time
the ruler became involved, it has escalated to such a point
that it was not so simple as to press the reset button as some
would have liked. "When rights may have been violated and
laws infringed, one cannot just conveniently wipe the slate
clean and pretend as if nothing had happened. "The ruler
cannot take sides in political contests, whether with acts of
commission or omission. He has to make decisions based on
justice and the rule of law," he said. In making the right
decision in any situation and act in a manner that is fair and
impartial, the ruler must be guided by the constitution, it encapsulates all the values that form the
very foundation of Malaysian society. In the Perak case, the ruler adhered closely to the letter and
spirit of the state constitution, he said.
After all, the ruler of Perak "Azlan has considerable knowledge of the law, having spoken and
written about it extensively throughout his career (as a judge and Lord President)," he said.
The Mighty Pen says: Nazrin the son of the senile ruler of Perak, take note that democracy is a
principle whereby the control of authority comes from the public, and ruler and non-ruler are the
same. Even though there is no specific, universally accepted definition of democracy, there are two
principles that any definition of democracy includes. The first principle is that all citizens, not
invested with the power to govern, have equal access to power and the second that all citizens
enjoy legitimized freedoms and liberties. When these basic freedoms and liberties are robbed of the
people, then the only civilized course of action by any
responsible citizen who cares about his nation, is to ensure
that his voice is heard loud and clear! Get this straight into
your ever conniving brain! When injustice becomes law,
rebellion becomes duty! If rebellions become the order of the
day, the nation is simply ruled by the criminals and the
corrupt. Ask yourself whether you and your family members
including your ‘guardian angel’, the Agong Najib, have
plundered the nation’s wealth and robbed the poor of a bare
minimum standard of living! It is a pity that only in Malaysia,
even the right to a peaceful demonstration is robbed of the
people! What’s worst, the peaceful demonstrations are
converted into lawless mobs by ‘peacekeepers’ who are
supposed to protect the peace of this nation.
Nazrin the illegal seller of Perak: Saintly words should never be uttered by a person who has lost
all sanity! If you still insist in building an impossible bridge between two mountains, just for that
clap of your ‘creativity’, then let us warn you that our actions too will have far reaching
consequences; we will destroy those mountains to mere ashes, and stuff your filthy mouth with the
last peck of that dust and prepare you for your last journey to the gates of the condemned hell!
4 Comments »
“Democracy does not mean anything goes….”
Daulat-ing means fulat-ing. Now we know – for sure.
Comment by wits0 — August 6, 2009 @ 08:50
1.
you tell him mighty pen. your pen strike very deep in his arsehole. i dunno whether it can penetrate
further.
Comment by jimcurry — August 6, 2009 @ 09:10
2.
i am sure he would have enjoyed it.
Comment by jimcurry — August 6, 2009 @ 09:15
3.
Its incredible how a supposedly wise person who was so well admired and overwhelmingly respected just
about a year ago could crumble so low in the popular rating now. So true of the saying “Never judge a
person by his looks and sweet talking” In the end, Truth always prevails. Now we all know, he is just
another one of them. For him to win back the same respect will take him another 2 lifetime.
Comment by toyolbuster — August 6, 2009 @ 09:19
4.
It seems the might of the pen has fallen into a filthy hand.A hand that has become a weapon of its own destruction.
This is what have become of Malaysians since Pakatan Rakyat took over the 5 states.They have taught the people to be rude, defiant and show no respect for the law and now no respect for the Sultan.Winning only 5 states have made them arrogance and intolerably rude.What more if they were the Federal government.By now the Malays should realise where Anwar Ibrahim and PAS are taking them to.
They made a big hullabaloo of the article in Utusan Malaysia, let's wait and see what kind of noise they make on this one.
Will Pakatan leaders come out and condemn this man who wrote such reviling article against the Sultan ? What about Nizar who was the cause of all the bad things happening in Perak, will he apologise to the Sultan?
Believe me, the answer will come at Permatang Pasir.
This is an apology to YB Loke Siew Fook who has categorically denied he was the one who posted the offending article against the Sultan of Perak.
Below is an extract from Rocky's Bru:
Loke Siew Fook, did you write that about our Sultan?
update: "No, I did not," says Loke.
The YB has left a strong denial in my comment box, which I am reproducing here:-
In Sabah and Sarawak we don't have Sultans, we only have Yang Dipertua Negeri, the equivalent of a governor, which is not of royal blood.In certain ways they have the same standing as sultans as far as state constitutions are concerned.They have the same prerogative to appoint chief minister of the state whom they think carry majority support of members of the state legislative assembly. They are accorded the same respect.So far no Sabahan and Sarawakians have openly insulted their heads of state.Dear Mr Rocky,
I strongly deny the allegation that I have written the article to insult the Sultan of Perak and Raja Nazrin. I have no prior knowledge whatsoever on that particular blog http://sjsandteam.wordpress.com/
My ONE and ONLY blog is lokesiewfook.blogspot.com
I have NEVER written anything that insult the Royalty, Malays or Islam in my life. There is an effort to slander DAP Youth and myself and spread lies that we are anti-Islam and anti-Royalty.
I do not know who is behind that blog and I have nothing to do with it.
As a responsible blogger, I hope you can first verify the facts before making any assumptions. I will be lodging a police report today to deny the article and I hope you can publish my explanation to clear the air later. Thank you.
Sultans are held in higher esteem and are apolitical.Whatever they do in their official functions must be in accordance with their state's constitution and the Sultan of Perak has in all respect abides by the constitution.Pakatan Rakyat in general and DAP in particular have painted a wicked picture of the Sultan to poison the people's mind to fulfil their political agenda.Now they have started insulting the Sultan.
As the Malay saying "dikasi betis nak kepala".In a moment of anger and refusal to accept their lost of power in Perak this bloke from DAP broke the cardinal rule and overstepped the invisible line of civility by insulting the Sultan of Perak and the Regeant.
DAP leaders deliberate obtuseness on the issue and poisoning the people's mind about the Sultan is now going to bite them back. They still could not accept that they have lost the Perak state government. It would be interesting to hear what the leaders in PAS would have to say about their partner's 'kurang ajar' against the Sultan who was only doing his job according to the state constitution which empowered him to make such decision.
Of course Pakatan leaders would say it is not the party's stand but when it comes to members of UMNO making remarks that they don't like they would condemned the whole party and the government.
Below is the 'kurang ajar' article;
The Might Of The Pen
August 6, 2009
NAZRIN OF PERAK PREPARES FOR HIS FINAL JOURNEY TO THE GATES
OF HELL!
Filed under: ARTICLE (LATEST) 06/08/2009, conspiracy, politics — sjsandteam @ 08:47
Tags: NAZRIN OF PERAK PREPARES FOR HIS FINAL JOURNEY TO THE GATES OF HELL!
Kuala Lumpur, Aug 5, 2009: "Democracy does not mean
anything goes. It certainly does not mean mob rule," Nazrin
of Perak said Wednesday night. He said in any functioning
democracy, there were rules as to how society was to be
governed, and in Malaysia, the rules were enshrined in the
country’s constitution. "Our constitution spells out not only
what our rights are but also what the limits to those rights
are. These limits ensure that decisions are not made by those
who wield the most power, shout the loudest or behave in
the crudest manner," he said.
Nazrin who sold the state of Perak to the BN thieves, was
delivering a speech titled "Imbued with Integrity, Endowed
with Ethics: Foundation for Managing Malaysia through
Enlightened Value-Driven Leadership" at the 25th Tunku
Abdul Rahman Lecture organised by the Malaysian Institute
of Management here.
Nazrin of the stolen state of Perak said: "If we seek to settle disputes through mob rule and
lawlessness, our disputes will never be settled." "Precisely because we have so much riding on the
judiciary, it is vitally important that there is judicial independence and impartiality. Without them,
the rule of law cannot prevail. And when the rule of law has become unhinged, it must be fully
restored," said the know-all Nazrin of Perak. He said since the country’s last general election in
March last year, political contestation has become more common and more intense, and this is
likely to continue for some time to come. "But whatever our differences, our overriding concern
must be to create the type of nation we can all be proud of. We must never turn our grand positive
sum nation-building endeavour into a fractious and destructive zero sum one. "We have a good
system of governance in place that has served us well and Malaysians should seek to improve on
1 of 9
and strengthen this system."
Nazrin of Perak said: "Wherever there are weaknesses, we should acknowledge them and strive to
overcome them." He said the Malay rulers are above partisan politics, and this is what a
constitutional monarchy means and what the rulers assiduously believe. "For until and unless
rulers are placed above everyday politics – and the controversies that will inevitably follow – they
will be unable to carry out their constitutional functions properly. These functions are necessary
for the operation of democracy in this country," he said.
Nazrin in trying to protect his ass said the present situation
in Perak stemmed from a political problem, that of political
crossovers, "but was very quickly compounded by other
decisions and actions of questionable legality.""By the time
the ruler became involved, it has escalated to such a point
that it was not so simple as to press the reset button as some
would have liked. "When rights may have been violated and
laws infringed, one cannot just conveniently wipe the slate
clean and pretend as if nothing had happened. "The ruler
cannot take sides in political contests, whether with acts of
commission or omission. He has to make decisions based on
justice and the rule of law," he said. In making the right
decision in any situation and act in a manner that is fair and
impartial, the ruler must be guided by the constitution, it encapsulates all the values that form the
very foundation of Malaysian society. In the Perak case, the ruler adhered closely to the letter and
spirit of the state constitution, he said.
After all, the ruler of Perak "Azlan has considerable knowledge of the law, having spoken and
written about it extensively throughout his career (as a judge and Lord President)," he said.
The Mighty Pen says: Nazrin the son of the senile ruler of Perak, take note that democracy is a
principle whereby the control of authority comes from the public, and ruler and non-ruler are the
same. Even though there is no specific, universally accepted definition of democracy, there are two
principles that any definition of democracy includes. The first principle is that all citizens, not
invested with the power to govern, have equal access to power and the second that all citizens
enjoy legitimized freedoms and liberties. When these basic freedoms and liberties are robbed of the
people, then the only civilized course of action by any
responsible citizen who cares about his nation, is to ensure
that his voice is heard loud and clear! Get this straight into
your ever conniving brain! When injustice becomes law,
rebellion becomes duty! If rebellions become the order of the
day, the nation is simply ruled by the criminals and the
corrupt. Ask yourself whether you and your family members
including your ‘guardian angel’, the Agong Najib, have
plundered the nation’s wealth and robbed the poor of a bare
minimum standard of living! It is a pity that only in Malaysia,
even the right to a peaceful demonstration is robbed of the
people! What’s worst, the peaceful demonstrations are
converted into lawless mobs by ‘peacekeepers’ who are
supposed to protect the peace of this nation.
Nazrin the illegal seller of Perak: Saintly words should never be uttered by a person who has lost
all sanity! If you still insist in building an impossible bridge between two mountains, just for that
clap of your ‘creativity’, then let us warn you that our actions too will have far reaching
consequences; we will destroy those mountains to mere ashes, and stuff your filthy mouth with the
last peck of that dust and prepare you for your last journey to the gates of the condemned hell!
4 Comments »
“Democracy does not mean anything goes….”
Daulat-ing means fulat-ing. Now we know – for sure.
Comment by wits0 — August 6, 2009 @ 08:50
1.
you tell him mighty pen. your pen strike very deep in his arsehole. i dunno whether it can penetrate
further.
Comment by jimcurry — August 6, 2009 @ 09:10
2.
i am sure he would have enjoyed it.
Comment by jimcurry — August 6, 2009 @ 09:15
3.
Its incredible how a supposedly wise person who was so well admired and overwhelmingly respected just
about a year ago could crumble so low in the popular rating now. So true of the saying “Never judge a
person by his looks and sweet talking” In the end, Truth always prevails. Now we all know, he is just
another one of them. For him to win back the same respect will take him another 2 lifetime.
Comment by toyolbuster — August 6, 2009 @ 09:19
4.
It seems the might of the pen has fallen into a filthy hand.A hand that has become a weapon of its own destruction.
This is what have become of Malaysians since Pakatan Rakyat took over the 5 states.They have taught the people to be rude, defiant and show no respect for the law and now no respect for the Sultan.Winning only 5 states have made them arrogance and intolerably rude.What more if they were the Federal government.By now the Malays should realise where Anwar Ibrahim and PAS are taking them to.
They made a big hullabaloo of the article in Utusan Malaysia, let's wait and see what kind of noise they make on this one.
Will Pakatan leaders come out and condemn this man who wrote such reviling article against the Sultan ? What about Nizar who was the cause of all the bad things happening in Perak, will he apologise to the Sultan?
Believe me, the answer will come at Permatang Pasir.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
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.
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.
Friday, May 15, 2009
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.
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.
Thursday, May 14, 2009
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.
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.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
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.
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.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
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.
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.
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.
Friday, May 8, 2009
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.
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.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
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:
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.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
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,”
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 ">
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.
Monday, February 23, 2009
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.
Well, then let HRH dissolve the Perak State Assembly & let the people of Perak decide.
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,
HLWell, 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!
Friday, February 20, 2009
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?
'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?
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Speaker More Powerful Than Sultan ?
Hantu Laut
Lack of experience and ignorance of rules and procedures is making life more and more difficult for Pakatan. Whether it is ignorance, arrogance or defiance, it has thrown the state of Perak into serious constitutional crisis.
Perak's Speaker of the Assembly V.Sivakumar abusing the rules and procedures of the assembly to keep Pakatan in power is shocking and unprecedented. His attempt through malfeasance to overthrow a government constitutionally appointed by the Sultan is making mockery of the Sultan's constitutional powers.
The job of a speaker is to ensure members of the house abide by the standing orders and sits as chairman of the 'committe of privileges'. It is not his job to take sides. He must be seen to be fair, impartial and without bias. He is speaker of the house representing all the members, not just Pakatan.If he can't carry on his duties fairly and without malice than he should tender his resignation.
The Speaker V.Sivakumar is now the most powerful man in Perak, more powerful than the Sultan of Perak.He can appoint and sack Menteri Besar and government. His impertinence is a slap in the Sultan's face.As Speaker of the assembly he must be seen to be fair, impartial, show no bias and must ensure the proceedings of the house are in accordance with rules and procedures of the assembly and that of the State and Federal Constitution.
This show of disrespect for the Sultan is a threat to the constitutional monarch and making mockery of the State and Federal Constitutions. Amazingly, some legal minds think the Speaker has the right to suspend those assemblymen to keep an illegal government in power.You can read the great minds here. Making general assumptions without quoting the relevant autority. This learned law professor may have forgotten that the whole Pakatan government had fallen when the Sultan deemed that Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin had lost the confidence of the majority members of the assembly and refused to dissolve the assembly.A new government and new menteri besar had been installed that the Sultan in his judgement deemed to command the majority support of the members of the house.
What the Speaker should have done is to ask for the assembly to be convened and to be attended by all assemblymen. Pakatan can, if they so wish, try to pass a vote of no confidence at the new menteri besar. A simple majority would suffice.
Under such situation few things can happen. The BN ignore the suspension and continue governing the state (not optimal choice), the Sultan dissolves the assembly and call for fresh elections (possible but unlikely), BN take the case to court or as last resort the Federal government can request the Agong, if he is satisfied such emergency exists, to impose emergency rule in Perak.
Or if the BN is confident of majority support of the members they should call for the assembly to be convened and remove Sivakumar as speaker.
Lack of experience and ignorance of rules and procedures is making life more and more difficult for Pakatan. Whether it is ignorance, arrogance or defiance, it has thrown the state of Perak into serious constitutional crisis.
Perak's Speaker of the Assembly V.Sivakumar abusing the rules and procedures of the assembly to keep Pakatan in power is shocking and unprecedented. His attempt through malfeasance to overthrow a government constitutionally appointed by the Sultan is making mockery of the Sultan's constitutional powers.
The job of a speaker is to ensure members of the house abide by the standing orders and sits as chairman of the 'committe of privileges'. It is not his job to take sides. He must be seen to be fair, impartial and without bias. He is speaker of the house representing all the members, not just Pakatan.If he can't carry on his duties fairly and without malice than he should tender his resignation.
The Speaker V.Sivakumar is now the most powerful man in Perak, more powerful than the Sultan of Perak.He can appoint and sack Menteri Besar and government. His impertinence is a slap in the Sultan's face.As Speaker of the assembly he must be seen to be fair, impartial, show no bias and must ensure the proceedings of the house are in accordance with rules and procedures of the assembly and that of the State and Federal Constitution.
This show of disrespect for the Sultan is a threat to the constitutional monarch and making mockery of the State and Federal Constitutions. Amazingly, some legal minds think the Speaker has the right to suspend those assemblymen to keep an illegal government in power.You can read the great minds here. Making general assumptions without quoting the relevant autority. This learned law professor may have forgotten that the whole Pakatan government had fallen when the Sultan deemed that Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin had lost the confidence of the majority members of the assembly and refused to dissolve the assembly.A new government and new menteri besar had been installed that the Sultan in his judgement deemed to command the majority support of the members of the house.
What the Speaker should have done is to ask for the assembly to be convened and to be attended by all assemblymen. Pakatan can, if they so wish, try to pass a vote of no confidence at the new menteri besar. A simple majority would suffice.
Under such situation few things can happen. The BN ignore the suspension and continue governing the state (not optimal choice), the Sultan dissolves the assembly and call for fresh elections (possible but unlikely), BN take the case to court or as last resort the Federal government can request the Agong, if he is satisfied such emergency exists, to impose emergency rule in Perak.
Or if the BN is confident of majority support of the members they should call for the assembly to be convened and remove Sivakumar as speaker.
Perak's No Government Blues
Hantu Laut
The Speaker of the Perak Legislative Assembly V Sivakumar has suspended the newly sworn in excos including new Menteri Besar Ramly Zahary for 12 months. Is he going according to procedures or acting with malice?
The Speaker has created a crisis situation, a stalemate.Perak has no government.Sivakumar could be made to answer on what disciplinary ground the 6 excos were suspended.The 6 was appointed following the appointment of a new menteri besar and a new government by the Sultan.By procedure Sivakumar should continue to act as Speaker of the house in a new government and should act impartially and with out malice.It should be business as usual and he should act as Speaker for the house and not as speaker for Pakatan. It was clear his action was to dwindle the number of BN assemblymen and to give Pakatan a majority sitting in the house for the next 12 months.
Is it going to happen, will Pakatan be back in the government? Was the speaker acting beyond his powers and his action construed as illegal.
If the impasse continue than Perak is moving toward emergency rule.The Federal government can go to the Agong and ask him to declare emergency in Perak under Article 150 of the Federal constitution.
The Speaker of the Perak Legislative Assembly V Sivakumar has suspended the newly sworn in excos including new Menteri Besar Ramly Zahary for 12 months. Is he going according to procedures or acting with malice?
The Speaker has created a crisis situation, a stalemate.Perak has no government.Sivakumar could be made to answer on what disciplinary ground the 6 excos were suspended.The 6 was appointed following the appointment of a new menteri besar and a new government by the Sultan.By procedure Sivakumar should continue to act as Speaker of the house in a new government and should act impartially and with out malice.It should be business as usual and he should act as Speaker for the house and not as speaker for Pakatan. It was clear his action was to dwindle the number of BN assemblymen and to give Pakatan a majority sitting in the house for the next 12 months.
Is it going to happen, will Pakatan be back in the government? Was the speaker acting beyond his powers and his action construed as illegal.
If the impasse continue than Perak is moving toward emergency rule.The Federal government can go to the Agong and ask him to declare emergency in Perak under Article 150 of the Federal constitution.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
Menteri Besar Kurang Ajar
Hantu Laut
There is no other word befitting former Menteri Besar of Perak Nizar Jamaluddin......kurang ajar! This man is so in love with power he is willing to severely
embarrass the Sultan and behaved like a spoilt child.Most people with the right sense of mind would have accepted it and wait for the outcome of the court case.
He said he is not against the Sultan but what he did by attending the Sultan's silver jubilee celebration uninvited was intentionally done to cause embarrassment to the Sultan in front of his other guests. Nizar has thrown down the gauntlet at the Sultan.Maybe, it's time for the Sultan to respond.
Since he has brought the case to court, isn't it proper to wait for the case to be heard and let the court decide.There may be 100,000 Perakians who say the Sultan is wrong because they listen to the skewed version from the people they supported. Do you think the kampong people know the working of the Constitution? Their sentiments would be based according to what the leaders in PAS and Pakatan explained to them.It is now without any doubt that Nizar had been encouraged by the leaders in PAS, DAP and PKR to ensure maximum damage to the Sultan's reputation. All the confessions that they were not against the Sultan were just lies and subterfuge.
Other Malay rulers should take caution, any of them could be next to face severe censure from Pakatan leaders and supporters if they are not happy with the ruler's decision even though there are provisions in the Constitution giving them the power to act accordingly.
Pakatan seems to have many highly qualified constitutional lawyers who think the Sultan was wrong in his decision, tantamount to accusing the Sultan of taking sides and favouring the BN to govern his state. Anwar Ibrahim who claimed to be the leader of the oppositions said they are not against the Sultan but appears to have no control over Nizar's tantalising and rude behaviour against the Sultan. Either that or he is hand in glove with the irascible former menteri besar to continuously hound the Sultan.Otherwise, there was no reason for Nizar to turn up at the palace uninvited.
Below is part of an article that appeared in Malaysian Insider that clearly shows the writer painting half a picture and not sure where he stands:
"But Malaysia is not an absolute monarchy but a constitutional monarchy. If it were an absolute monarchy, then Sultan Azlan Shah or any Malay Ruler would have complete power over all aspects of life in the state. In an absolute monarchy there is no constitution or legal restriction on the monarch's power.
There is no other word befitting former Menteri Besar of Perak Nizar Jamaluddin......kurang ajar! This man is so in love with power he is willing to severely
embarrass the Sultan and behaved like a spoilt child.Most people with the right sense of mind would have accepted it and wait for the outcome of the court case.
He said he is not against the Sultan but what he did by attending the Sultan's silver jubilee celebration uninvited was intentionally done to cause embarrassment to the Sultan in front of his other guests. Nizar has thrown down the gauntlet at the Sultan.Maybe, it's time for the Sultan to respond.
Since he has brought the case to court, isn't it proper to wait for the case to be heard and let the court decide.There may be 100,000 Perakians who say the Sultan is wrong because they listen to the skewed version from the people they supported. Do you think the kampong people know the working of the Constitution? Their sentiments would be based according to what the leaders in PAS and Pakatan explained to them.It is now without any doubt that Nizar had been encouraged by the leaders in PAS, DAP and PKR to ensure maximum damage to the Sultan's reputation. All the confessions that they were not against the Sultan were just lies and subterfuge.
Other Malay rulers should take caution, any of them could be next to face severe censure from Pakatan leaders and supporters if they are not happy with the ruler's decision even though there are provisions in the Constitution giving them the power to act accordingly.
Pakatan seems to have many highly qualified constitutional lawyers who think the Sultan was wrong in his decision, tantamount to accusing the Sultan of taking sides and favouring the BN to govern his state. Anwar Ibrahim who claimed to be the leader of the oppositions said they are not against the Sultan but appears to have no control over Nizar's tantalising and rude behaviour against the Sultan. Either that or he is hand in glove with the irascible former menteri besar to continuously hound the Sultan.Otherwise, there was no reason for Nizar to turn up at the palace uninvited.
Below is part of an article that appeared in Malaysian Insider that clearly shows the writer painting half a picture and not sure where he stands:
"But Malaysia is not an absolute monarchy but a constitutional monarchy. If it were an absolute monarchy, then Sultan Azlan Shah or any Malay Ruler would have complete power over all aspects of life in the state. In an absolute monarchy there is no constitution or legal restriction on the monarch's power.
But in a constitutional monarchy like Malaysia, the power of the Sultan is restrained by a parliament, by law, or by custom. In short, his decisions can be questioned and challenged. More so after 1993 when the constitution was amended by the Mahathir administration to remove the immunity Malay Rulers enjoyed from legal action".
You can read the full article here.
True, Malaysia is not an absolute monarchy.
Wrong, there are rules in the Constitution that gives rulers certain powers that shouldn't be challenged.
The Eight Schedule (Article 71)of Federal Constitution:Provisions To Be Inserted In State Constitutions.
(2) The ruler may act in his discretion in the performance of the following functions (in addition to those in the performance of which he may act in his discretion under the Federal Constitution) that is to say:
(a) the appointment of a Menteri Besar;
(b) the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of the Legislative Assembly;
(c) the making of a request for a meeting of the Conference of Ruler concerned solely with the privileges,position,honours and dignities of Their Royal Highnesses or religious acts, observances or ceremonies;
(d) any function as Head of the religion of Islam or relating to the customs of the Malays;
(e) the appointment of an heir or heirs, consort,Regent or Council of Regency;
(f) the appointment of persons to Malay customary ranks,titles,honours and dignities and the designation of the functions appertaining thereto;
(g) the regulation of royal courts and palaces.
The Sultan of Perak was an ex Lord President and well-versed in the rules of law.Would he stakes his name to do anything unconstitutional and to take sides?
All the Pakatan leaders knew these are the laws but they didn't give a damn because they were angry that they have lost the government and blamed the Sultan instead of themselves.They instigated their supporters to demonstrate to try force the Sultan to change his mind.Protest and demonstration is Anwar's brand of politics. Only he can spearhead such monumental demonstrations.
After the March 2008 Elections when the Sultan of Trengganu refused to swear in the menteri besar chosen by Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi, it was true Badawi was unhappy, but he stood down and eventually let the Sultan appoint the menteri besar of his choice.There was no huge demonstration and continuous show of defiance by Badawi and there was no threat of legal action against the Sultan.
When Mahathir amended the Federal Constitution to remove the immunity of the rulers it was confined mainly to civil and criminal cases and royal assent to Bills passed by Parliament.He did not curtail the constitutional powers of the rulers to deal with matters of state embodied within their respective state constitution.
All rulers can only be tried in a Special Court as set out in Article 182 of the Federal Constitution and cannot be tried personally without the consent of the Attorney General as set out in Article 183.
Why do you think Pakatan dropped the case personally against the Sultan? They found out that they can't sue the Sultan without the AG's consent.If it was that easy they would surely want to take the Sultan to the cleaners.Now, they have changed their tune and denied they are against the Sultan.How do you reconcile the two contradictory statements. We are not against you but we will disobey and show our defiance against you.
To Nizar and those in Pakatan ..... be civilised, stand down and wait for the court case.
For Perak Legislative Assembly Speaker V.Sivakumar, don't shame yourself, the government who put you there is gone, just go gracefully.
This the most stupendously stupid case I have come across.They have taken the case to court and yet still insisted they are the legitimate government and refused to let go and the Speaker talked cock about removing the new Menteri Besar.
How do you deal with this kind of people ? They want the best of both worlds.Have their cake and eat it.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
The Keris(UMNO) Is Not A Write-Off Yet
Hantu Laut
With two by-elections looming UMNO may have to start counting the days to the next general elections. The Perak crisis could further aggravate its already shattered image.UMNO can forget the Chinese and Indian voters altogether.It is not even worth the afford to spend too much time and money to campaign in Chinese and Indian areas because it's a foregone conclusion that the Chinese and Indians do not want UMNO or the BN.Only the Malays can save them from going into oblivion.UMNO should field Malay candidates for both the Bukit Selembau state constituency in Kedah and the Bukit Gantang parliamentary seat.It will be a tough fight but at least you have a fighting chance.
Strange as it may sound, PAS the smallest outfit in the Perak coalition government was the biggest trouble maker in the current constitutional crisis in the State. Almost all of the demonstrators against the Sultan's decision not to dissolve the state assembly were members and supporters of PAS.Undoubtedly, PAS had become the cry-baby for Pakatan, making the Menteri Besar the cause celebre to rouse Malay sentiments to go against UMNO and the Sultan.The Menteri Besar is working under the auspices of DAP and PKR.He has served his masters well. He was there because the state constitution forbids non-Malay from becoming menteri besar, in another word he is an 'accidental' menteri besar, not someone who is there because majority want him there. Basically, if not for the prohibition in the constitition, Perak would be another Penang and would have a Chinese menteri besar and Chinese majority government.
The political pundits that predicted the demise of UMNO may have jumped the gun.UMNO is not a write off yet in Perak.DAP and PKR were there mainly because of the Chinese and Indians.PAS was riding the wave blown by the wind of change.PAS and PKR can hardly say they represent the Malays. They only have total of 13 seats together and PKR, pathetically, only have 3 Malay seats, the rest 3 Chinese and 1 Indian.
Pakatan only have total of 9 Malay seats in Perak against UMNO 27. To say dissolution of the assembly might make history of UMNO in Perak and make Pakatan much stronger may not hold water. UMNO still have strong Malay supports in the state.Now, it is a matter of reinforcing this support in the areas where the majority were marginal.
The uninitiated, the dreamers and the misled are sold by the idea of 'Bangsa Malaysia' that we often see prominently displayed in many blogs that support Anwar and Pakatan.It's true we all should work toward that single entity but is there any semblance of truth that under Pakatan this can be achieved or it's just the opposite, race relations have actually deteriorated since after the 8 March 2008 Elections.
The 12th General Elections was the most racially polarised elections ever held in this country. Never before have the people voted so much on racial line.The make up of the state assemblies in Pakatan control states are reflections of the voting trends in the last elections.
The 'Bangsa Malaysia' promoted by Anwar and Pakatan is a propaganda and could well be just a pipe dream.They have not made any sincere effort to work on it other than providing lip service.They have done more to hurt race relations.Those who are besotted with Anwar and Pakatan may not realise this and those who know would refuse to admit it but it's a fact race relations has deteriorated to a worrying level and the BN government poor handling of many issues have added more salt to the wound.
If Anwar and his Pakatan partners are serious about 'Bangsa Malaysia' than they should form one multi-racial party.Maybe, DAP and PAS should be dissolved and all come under one umbrella of PKR. Otherwise, it is no different from BN, a grouping of race-based political parties.
It would still be tough fight for UMNO in the forthcoming by-elections but the constitutional crisis could be their blessing in disguise.
Losing the 2 by-polls could spell disaster for UMNO in the next general elections.
With two by-elections looming UMNO may have to start counting the days to the next general elections. The Perak crisis could further aggravate its already shattered image.UMNO can forget the Chinese and Indian voters altogether.It is not even worth the afford to spend too much time and money to campaign in Chinese and Indian areas because it's a foregone conclusion that the Chinese and Indians do not want UMNO or the BN.Only the Malays can save them from going into oblivion.UMNO should field Malay candidates for both the Bukit Selembau state constituency in Kedah and the Bukit Gantang parliamentary seat.It will be a tough fight but at least you have a fighting chance.
Strange as it may sound, PAS the smallest outfit in the Perak coalition government was the biggest trouble maker in the current constitutional crisis in the State. Almost all of the demonstrators against the Sultan's decision not to dissolve the state assembly were members and supporters of PAS.Undoubtedly, PAS had become the cry-baby for Pakatan, making the Menteri Besar the cause celebre to rouse Malay sentiments to go against UMNO and the Sultan.The Menteri Besar is working under the auspices of DAP and PKR.He has served his masters well. He was there because the state constitution forbids non-Malay from becoming menteri besar, in another word he is an 'accidental' menteri besar, not someone who is there because majority want him there. Basically, if not for the prohibition in the constitition, Perak would be another Penang and would have a Chinese menteri besar and Chinese majority government.
The political pundits that predicted the demise of UMNO may have jumped the gun.UMNO is not a write off yet in Perak.DAP and PKR were there mainly because of the Chinese and Indians.PAS was riding the wave blown by the wind of change.PAS and PKR can hardly say they represent the Malays. They only have total of 13 seats together and PKR, pathetically, only have 3 Malay seats, the rest 3 Chinese and 1 Indian.
Pakatan only have total of 9 Malay seats in Perak against UMNO 27. To say dissolution of the assembly might make history of UMNO in Perak and make Pakatan much stronger may not hold water. UMNO still have strong Malay supports in the state.Now, it is a matter of reinforcing this support in the areas where the majority were marginal.
The uninitiated, the dreamers and the misled are sold by the idea of 'Bangsa Malaysia' that we often see prominently displayed in many blogs that support Anwar and Pakatan.It's true we all should work toward that single entity but is there any semblance of truth that under Pakatan this can be achieved or it's just the opposite, race relations have actually deteriorated since after the 8 March 2008 Elections.
The 12th General Elections was the most racially polarised elections ever held in this country. Never before have the people voted so much on racial line.The make up of the state assemblies in Pakatan control states are reflections of the voting trends in the last elections.
The 'Bangsa Malaysia' promoted by Anwar and Pakatan is a propaganda and could well be just a pipe dream.They have not made any sincere effort to work on it other than providing lip service.They have done more to hurt race relations.Those who are besotted with Anwar and Pakatan may not realise this and those who know would refuse to admit it but it's a fact race relations has deteriorated to a worrying level and the BN government poor handling of many issues have added more salt to the wound.
If Anwar and his Pakatan partners are serious about 'Bangsa Malaysia' than they should form one multi-racial party.Maybe, DAP and PAS should be dissolved and all come under one umbrella of PKR. Otherwise, it is no different from BN, a grouping of race-based political parties.
It would still be tough fight for UMNO in the forthcoming by-elections but the constitutional crisis could be their blessing in disguise.
Losing the 2 by-polls could spell disaster for UMNO in the next general elections.
Monday, February 9, 2009
Changing Tune:The Pied Piper Of Perak
Hantu Laut
A regular commentator SM asked me why I have deep hatred for Anwar Ibrahim. I told him I have no hatred for Anwar, it is just that I hate hypocrisy, inconsistency and double standard and Anwar epitomises all of these. His covetousness for power and the end justifies the mean to get there is going to be his next fall from grace. He extols civil disobedience and defiance of the law. The Perak constitutional crisis is one such case.He has successfully made the Sultan the punching bag of the people.The Sultan had been fair in his judgement, he personally met the 31 assemblymen at the palace and all of them expressed no confidence against the MB and the government. How could the MB be granted dissolution of the assembly when he has lost confidence of the majority of the members of the house. Whatever it may be Pakatan leaders and supporters would still insist they were right and the Sultan was wrong.
The Sultan has discretionary power to grant or not to grand dissolution, to say otherwise and accused the Sultan of taking sides is making mockery of the State and Federal constitutions and the monarch.A completely ignorant and bias interpretation of the constitution from someone who has absolutely no clue about its working is here. She is confused between 'confidence of the majority members of the assembly' and 'confidence of the majority members of political party'. I hope she is not a lawyer advising PKR.
Karpal Singh was right when he asked Anwar to step down as leader of the oppositions. Pakatan supporters are too blinded to see where this man is taking them, it just like when you are besotted with someone you can't see the flaws and faults in them until it wears out than you realise it's too late, the damage done.
As hypocritical and inconsistence as they can be they are now changing the tune and say they are not against the Sultan, will not sue him and will bring the message to the people and at the same time the Menteri Besar Nazir Jamaluddin will travel the length and breadth of Perak to convince the people he is still the legitimate menteri besar.
If you have your brain in the right place what does that tell you.As George Bush have said "If you are not with me, you are against me".He is not against the Sultan but refused to respect and comply with the Sultan's decision.If you are not against the Sultan than you should respect his decision and stop going around misleading the people.
This is what Anwar and Pakatan all about, they change their story when they feel the rising tide moving against them.They claimed Najib had robbed the rights of the people by masterminding a "coup d'etat" and MB Nazir in true Anwar's style said "We will take back the right stolen by Najib Altantuya" to a 8000 gullible Malays, mostly PAS supporters. The coup was made possible by Anwar's men.
Didn't know Najib has changed his surname to Altantuya.
A regular commentator SM asked me why I have deep hatred for Anwar Ibrahim. I told him I have no hatred for Anwar, it is just that I hate hypocrisy, inconsistency and double standard and Anwar epitomises all of these. His covetousness for power and the end justifies the mean to get there is going to be his next fall from grace. He extols civil disobedience and defiance of the law. The Perak constitutional crisis is one such case.He has successfully made the Sultan the punching bag of the people.The Sultan had been fair in his judgement, he personally met the 31 assemblymen at the palace and all of them expressed no confidence against the MB and the government. How could the MB be granted dissolution of the assembly when he has lost confidence of the majority of the members of the house. Whatever it may be Pakatan leaders and supporters would still insist they were right and the Sultan was wrong.
The Sultan has discretionary power to grant or not to grand dissolution, to say otherwise and accused the Sultan of taking sides is making mockery of the State and Federal constitutions and the monarch.A completely ignorant and bias interpretation of the constitution from someone who has absolutely no clue about its working is here. She is confused between 'confidence of the majority members of the assembly' and 'confidence of the majority members of political party'. I hope she is not a lawyer advising PKR.
Karpal Singh was right when he asked Anwar to step down as leader of the oppositions. Pakatan supporters are too blinded to see where this man is taking them, it just like when you are besotted with someone you can't see the flaws and faults in them until it wears out than you realise it's too late, the damage done.
As hypocritical and inconsistence as they can be they are now changing the tune and say they are not against the Sultan, will not sue him and will bring the message to the people and at the same time the Menteri Besar Nazir Jamaluddin will travel the length and breadth of Perak to convince the people he is still the legitimate menteri besar.
If you have your brain in the right place what does that tell you.As George Bush have said "If you are not with me, you are against me".He is not against the Sultan but refused to respect and comply with the Sultan's decision.If you are not against the Sultan than you should respect his decision and stop going around misleading the people.
This is what Anwar and Pakatan all about, they change their story when they feel the rising tide moving against them.They claimed Najib had robbed the rights of the people by masterminding a "coup d'etat" and MB Nazir in true Anwar's style said "We will take back the right stolen by Najib Altantuya" to a 8000 gullible Malays, mostly PAS supporters. The coup was made possible by Anwar's men.
Didn't know Najib has changed his surname to Altantuya.
Sunday, February 8, 2009
Anwar Ibrahim's Grand Plan In The Mist
Hantu Laut
We all agree party hopping is demeaning and morally unacceptable to many, especially those who voted for the candidate on a party's platform of their choice.The people's repulsion against such behaviour is understandable.The unfortunate part is, there is no law against it and is against the Federal constitution to suppress it.Everyone should have the freedom of association.
What those in Pakatan failed to see is their own indulgence in political masochism. Rather than accepting the rule of law and do a self-examination of where they went wrong, they wilfully incited confrontation with the Sultan and instigated and encouraged the people to go on the street to show their anger against the Sultan. This is Anwar's brand of politics, protest and demonstration is his trademark.
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stone". Most of our politicians have short and selected memory and unashamedly dished out advices and make comments for which they have lost the right to do so, which they conveniently forget.
One of the frogs that brought down the PBS government in 1994 Yong TecK Lee has something to say here. In today's Daily Express headline another frog, Deputy Transport Minister Lajim Okin said it is OK to be a frog and it is normal for elected representatives to jump ship as there could be goodness coming out of it.He said Sabah benefited when he deserted PBS for the BN and leaders who jump do not do it for personal gain , they do it for the interest of the people. Certainly can't agree with this doggone piece of crap.Every frog does it out of greed and personal gain.
Perak ludicrous MB Nizar Jamaluddin should take a leaf out of Joseph Pairin's book.When Anwar raided the PBS for its assemblymen in 1994 he managed to steal 3 assemblymen to crossover to BN and brought down the PBS government and Pairin.A new chief minister from UMNO was appointed and Pairin being a true gentleman and one that respect the rule of law willingly stepped down as chief minister, without challenging the Yang Dipertuan Negeri's decision.
The Perak case is no different from what happened in Sabah in 1994. The only difference, the Perak MB is thick-headed, a belligerent, a recalcitrant and have no respect for the rule of law and have shown great disrespect to the Sultan.He sun-addled brain is incapable of making sense of the whole issue.
If this belligerent menteri besar and all the educated fools in Pakatan think they have a strong case than the right arena to fight it out is in the court of law, not in the streets using goons, schnooks and idiots who can only understand the law of the jungle.The confrontation, belligerence and lack of savoir faire by the Menteri Besar, Anwar and other Pakatan leaders were intended to scurrilously damage the Sultan's reputation.
Joining in the fray and with his own interpretation of the law is none other than the outcast top dog of the biggest law firm in the country, Zaid Ibrahim.This sententious lawyer thinks the Sultan was wrong and should not have asked the MB to resign.If you have majority of the members expressed no confidence in the MB and his government does it matter whether it is held in the assembly or the palace and I wonder which specific section of the State constitution says show of hands in the Assembly should be the only procedure.I also wonder what would Zaid's comment be if he was still in UMNO?
The absurdity of the some of the argument put forth by some legal minds and some 'lawyer buruk' that the BN has no majority because both sides have 28 seats each shows the ignorance and lack of understanding of the working of the law.The confidence of the majority should come from members of the assembly not members of political party.It can be an aggregate of BN,Pakatan and Independent assemblymen.Those Pakatan assemblymen who wanted to support BN don't even need to change party, they can do so while still in Pakatan, if they wish.Of course they would be sacked by the party if they made the stand to support BN.
The three rebels could have easily conspired with the BN secretly and let BN call for a motion of confidence to remove the MB and supported it while assembly is in session.The end game would be the same, Pakatan will be out of office.
Anwar and his gang may regret the day they embarrassed the Sultan and created an explosively tense situation that could endanger the safety of the Sultan and his family.The calling will come when the Malays turned against him in the very near future.This culture of protests and demonstrations is taking the country down the road to Africa.Now, in Africa, they don't demonstrate anymore, they just go on a killing spree.
The Malays will eventually see his action as protecting the DAP majority government and his own self interest and used a Malay menteri besar to rouse the Malay sentiments.This sentiments will be short-lived when the Malays see the true light of Anwar Ibrahim's grand plan, to be prime minister, by hook or by crook, doesn't bother him which road he takes to Putrajaya, as long as he gets there.
As leader of the opposition Anwar Ibrahim should be made responsible if there were to be breakdown of law and order.
We all agree party hopping is demeaning and morally unacceptable to many, especially those who voted for the candidate on a party's platform of their choice.The people's repulsion against such behaviour is understandable.The unfortunate part is, there is no law against it and is against the Federal constitution to suppress it.Everyone should have the freedom of association.
What those in Pakatan failed to see is their own indulgence in political masochism. Rather than accepting the rule of law and do a self-examination of where they went wrong, they wilfully incited confrontation with the Sultan and instigated and encouraged the people to go on the street to show their anger against the Sultan. This is Anwar's brand of politics, protest and demonstration is his trademark.
"People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stone". Most of our politicians have short and selected memory and unashamedly dished out advices and make comments for which they have lost the right to do so, which they conveniently forget.
One of the frogs that brought down the PBS government in 1994 Yong TecK Lee has something to say here. In today's Daily Express headline another frog, Deputy Transport Minister Lajim Okin said it is OK to be a frog and it is normal for elected representatives to jump ship as there could be goodness coming out of it.He said Sabah benefited when he deserted PBS for the BN and leaders who jump do not do it for personal gain , they do it for the interest of the people. Certainly can't agree with this doggone piece of crap.Every frog does it out of greed and personal gain.
Perak ludicrous MB Nizar Jamaluddin should take a leaf out of Joseph Pairin's book.When Anwar raided the PBS for its assemblymen in 1994 he managed to steal 3 assemblymen to crossover to BN and brought down the PBS government and Pairin.A new chief minister from UMNO was appointed and Pairin being a true gentleman and one that respect the rule of law willingly stepped down as chief minister, without challenging the Yang Dipertuan Negeri's decision.
The Perak case is no different from what happened in Sabah in 1994. The only difference, the Perak MB is thick-headed, a belligerent, a recalcitrant and have no respect for the rule of law and have shown great disrespect to the Sultan.He sun-addled brain is incapable of making sense of the whole issue.
If this belligerent menteri besar and all the educated fools in Pakatan think they have a strong case than the right arena to fight it out is in the court of law, not in the streets using goons, schnooks and idiots who can only understand the law of the jungle.The confrontation, belligerence and lack of savoir faire by the Menteri Besar, Anwar and other Pakatan leaders were intended to scurrilously damage the Sultan's reputation.
Joining in the fray and with his own interpretation of the law is none other than the outcast top dog of the biggest law firm in the country, Zaid Ibrahim.This sententious lawyer thinks the Sultan was wrong and should not have asked the MB to resign.If you have majority of the members expressed no confidence in the MB and his government does it matter whether it is held in the assembly or the palace and I wonder which specific section of the State constitution says show of hands in the Assembly should be the only procedure.I also wonder what would Zaid's comment be if he was still in UMNO?
The absurdity of the some of the argument put forth by some legal minds and some 'lawyer buruk' that the BN has no majority because both sides have 28 seats each shows the ignorance and lack of understanding of the working of the law.The confidence of the majority should come from members of the assembly not members of political party.It can be an aggregate of BN,Pakatan and Independent assemblymen.Those Pakatan assemblymen who wanted to support BN don't even need to change party, they can do so while still in Pakatan, if they wish.Of course they would be sacked by the party if they made the stand to support BN.
The three rebels could have easily conspired with the BN secretly and let BN call for a motion of confidence to remove the MB and supported it while assembly is in session.The end game would be the same, Pakatan will be out of office.
Anwar and his gang may regret the day they embarrassed the Sultan and created an explosively tense situation that could endanger the safety of the Sultan and his family.The calling will come when the Malays turned against him in the very near future.This culture of protests and demonstrations is taking the country down the road to Africa.Now, in Africa, they don't demonstrate anymore, they just go on a killing spree.
The Malays will eventually see his action as protecting the DAP majority government and his own self interest and used a Malay menteri besar to rouse the Malay sentiments.This sentiments will be short-lived when the Malays see the true light of Anwar Ibrahim's grand plan, to be prime minister, by hook or by crook, doesn't bother him which road he takes to Putrajaya, as long as he gets there.
As leader of the opposition Anwar Ibrahim should be made responsible if there were to be breakdown of law and order.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
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