KUALA LUMPUR, May 10 (Bernama) -- Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Tun Hussein said the government does not expect P. Utahayakumar to say thanks for his release from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA).
"We did not expect him to thank the government. He is stubborn, tore his shirt before his release and also spread all sorts of lies.
"I like to remind him that as a normal citizen free from the ISA, he is not immuned from other laws," he said when commenting on Uthayakumar's statement that he would not thank the government for the release.
Hishammuddin said the allegations and lies thrown by Uthayakumar would be exposed and that firm action would be taken against him for breaking the law.
Uthayakumar, leader of the banned Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) was among 13 ISA detainees released by the government yesterday.
They were in detention under the ISA since Dec 2007.
KUALA LUMPUR, 11 May 2009: Negeri Sembilan MIC chief Datuk T Rajagopalu today confirmed that he would contest the party vice-presidency at the party elections in September.
"I have served in the party's central working committee (CWC) over the last 10 years, been the state MIC chairperson and also a state executive councillor. I think the time is right for me to contest the post.
"Now with the party heading for a leadership change, I feel I should contest one of the three vice-president seats," the 58-year-old lawyer told Bernama when contacted.
Rajagopalu, however, said he had yet to inform MIC president Datuk Seri S Samy Vellu of his intention to contest the post.
The MIC national elections in September will pick a deputy president, three vice-presidents and 23 CWC members. Samy Vellu won the presidential election unopposed in March this year.
The deputy president post is expected to witness a four-cornered tussle, with incumbent Datuk G Palanivel being challenged by former deputy president Datuk S Subramaniam, vice-president Datuk S Sothinathan and secretary-general and Human Resources Minister Datuk Dr S Subramaniam.
S Vell Paari, son of the president, is the only one so far who had received divisional nominations for him to contest the veep post.
However, under the MIC constitution, there is no need for any leader to be nominated by any division as one nomination signed by two delegates — a proposer and seconder — to the MIC assembly is enough to meet the eligibility requirement.
Apart from Sothinathan, Datuk S Veerasingham is the other incumbent veep.
Tan Sri KS Nijhar, one of the three veeps, resigned more than a year ago. - Bernama
KUALA LUMPUR, 11 May 2009: Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk T Murugiah has received two bullet casings and a note which warned him against contesting for any posts in the People's Progressive Party (PPP) elections.
Kuala Lumpur police chief Datuk Wira Muhammad Sabtu Osman said the 9mm bullet casings were recovered from a parcel which was received by Murugiah's office in Putrajaya at 2.30pm today.
"Murigiah was threatened with death should he vie for any posts in the PPP elections," Muhammad Sabtu told Bernama via a short messaging service today.
The PPP executive council has taken a decision to sack Murugiah on 9 May for purportedly being involved in money politics.
Murugiah, 45, responded by saying that he had no intention of challenging PPP president Datuk M Kayveas at party polls next month. — Bernama
PUTRAJAYA, 11 May 2009: The status of the Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) movement, which had been declared illegal, would be reviewed if the organisation makes an appeal to the Home Ministry to reconsider the status.
Home Minister Datuk Seri Hishammuddin Hussein said for the time being, the (illegal) status remained, as the application to register the movement was rejected before.
"If they want us to reconsider the status they have to make an appeal. When they do make the appeal, I will reconsider the status," he told reporters after visiting the National Registration Department, here today.
Hishammuddin was asked to comment on the status of the organisation, after all its five leaders were released from detention under the Internal Security Act (ISA), including three who were released on 9 May.
Hishammuddin said the government had tried to be fair by releasing all of them, since they were no more a threat to the country, and they should be fair in their action in future.
Asked about Hindraf's chairperson P Waythamoorthy's statement saying he was coming back to Malaysia, Hishammuddin said he would not want to speculate anything on Waythamoorthy's status, but the ministry would review the application, if there was any.
Asked whether Waythamoorthy, who is currently living in self-imposed exile in London would be arrested if he were to come back, Hishammuddin said he would check the matter with the police.
On Hindraf's legal adviser and Kota Alam Shah assemblyperson M Manoharan's statement, saying he was going to sue to government over his detention under the ISA, Hishammuddin said it was not a big deal as suits could be filed by anybody.
"He could have done that before, we'll face the court if he wants to sue. It's his right," he said.
On another matter, Hishammuddin said there would be no more comment about suspected Singaporean terrorist Mas Selamat Kastari, who was caught by Malaysian police last week, to allow investigation to carry on.
"The investigation is a sensitive matter, it involves three different countries and three intelligent agencies, it involves other parties, and both the Deputy Prime Minister and acting Home Minister of Singapore and I have decided we would not comment anymore on the issue of Mas Selamat," he said.
However, he said the matter would also be the agenda on Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak's official visit to Singapore soon.
1920: The Malaysian Bar president Ragunath Kesavan has issued a press statement:
No doubt Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir will now appeal this decision to the Court of Appeal, and further legal arguments will be advanced. Whichever side that loses at the Court of Appeal will then appeal to the Federal Court. The issue will go on and on. Each round of legal battles promises finality but fails to deliver it. Time moves on, and the business of running the State Government continues to be sidelined.
The answer ultimately does not lie in the courts. The Malaysian Bar once again reiterates its position that the time has come for all concerned to acknowledge the writing on the wall. Both sides of the political divide must now realise that power has to be returned to where it rightly belongs – in the hands of the people, the electorate of the State of Perak. Let them cease all further jostling and manoeuvring for political power. Let them exhibit statesmanship. Let them once again seek the mandate of the people. And let the people decide.
1850: Jalan Istana, leading to the usual entrance to the State Government complex, is still open to traffic. The eight riot police trucks, including two water cannon vehicles, are stationed at the entrance. A downpour drenches the city now. Showers of blessing?
1810: Here we go again. It’s a familiar sight by now.
Just before 6.00pm today, eight riot police trucks arrived at the Perak state government complex, which also houses the State Assembly building, along Jalan Istana to take up positions, an eye-witness told me.
The real deal: Perak Mentri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin below the Democracy Tree
So the High Court has ruled that Nizar is the rightful MB and Zambry and his exco members are to vacate their posts with immediate effect.
Justice Abdul Aziz Abd Rahim ruled that a Mentri Besar can only be dismissed by a vote of no confidence.
This is a brave verdict by a courageous judge.
So where does this leave the Perak State Assembly, which now has “two Speakers”?
In my mind, as in the minds of most right-thinking Malaysians, the only way out of this mess is to dissolve the assembly.
Unless the BN wants to prolong the political mess by appealing the decision. But then, on 23 March, the Federal Court had already ruled that the case should be heard by the High Court.
God is great. Does Zambry now hold the record for “Mentri Besar” with the shortest reign? No, not even that, as he was never the Mentri Besar yang sah to begin with - as the High Court has just ruled and as most Malaysians already knew right from the start.
» He disagreed with the submission of Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, as intervenor, that there were only two circumstances under which a mentri besar could request for the dissolution of the legislative assembly.
"The A-G submitted that a mentri besar can only request for dissolution when the life term of the assembly comes to an end, that is under Article 36(2) and the other one is when he ceases to have command of the majority.
"I do not agree with this. Under Article 36 of the Perak Constitution, there are unlimited circumstances for the menteri besar to request for dissolution from the Sultan, and it is up to the mentri besar to choose his time (to request for dissolution)."
» He also disagreed with the A-G and Dr Zambry Abd Kadir's earlier submission that Nizar was deemed to have resigned from the office of mentri besar although he (Nizar) refused to do so.
"The A-G and the respondent argued that the word 'shall resign' in Article 16(6) meant that it is mandatory that the menteri besar must resign.
"What if the mentri besar refuses to resign? However mandatory it is, the provision cannot be interpreted to mean that the mentri besar is deemed to resign," said Abdul Aziz, who suggested that the article be amended to rectify the lacuna in Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution.
» On the issue of the affidavit by Perak State Legal Adviser Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, Abdul Aziz ruled that he was not a neutral and impartial witness.
"It was his own admission that he was instructed by the respondent's counsel to affirm the affidavit. The word instructed is a very strong word.
"To me, he is not a neutral or impartial witness; his testimony was coloured by the instruction that he received," said Abdul Aziz.
» He preferred Nizar's version of what transpired during the audience with the Sultan of Perak at Istana Kinta on Feb 4, that he asked for a dissolution under Article 36 (2) for general purpose than Ahmad Kamal's evidence that the request was made under Article 16(6) due to loss of confidence.
He said Kamal had testified he had no personal interest and nothing to benefit from the case but he would take Kamal's evidence with a "pinch of salt".
He said Kamal testified under cross-examination that he did not make any effort to contact Nizar to correct the Proclamation of Dissolution that Nizar took with him when asking for dissolution from the Sultan of Perak.
(In the Proclamation of Dissolution draft, Nizar asked for dissolution under Article 36(2) for dissolution under general provision. Kamal said Nizar was asking for a dissolution under Article 16 (6) stating loss of confidence).
Abdul Aziz said Kamal read the Proclamation and he should have "realised the mistake" but made no correction.
"I would have thought he would contact Nizar to correct or suggest correction before presenting to the Sultan."
Abdul Aziz said Kamal testified he did not take the course of action, saying that the Sultan had not decided yet.
He said Kamal is state legal adviser and his duty is to advise on all legal matters referred to him, including advising Nizar on the draft of Proclamation.
11 Mei 2009, Petaling Jaya- Alhamdulillah saya menyambut baik keputusan mahkamah tinggi hari ini yang mengistiharkan YAB Dato’ Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin selaku Menteri Besar Perak yang sah. Keputusan tersebut merupakan satu kemenangan buat rakyat dan juga sistem demokrasi di negara ini. Kami menyeru agar YAB Dato’ Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin dengan segera dikembalikan jawatan beliau sebagai Menteri Besar Perak.
Keputusan hari ini membuktikan bahawa Perlembagaan merupakan undang-undang tertinggi di negara ini. Makanya adalah mustahak bagi semua institusi kerajaan untuk menghormati semangat yang termaktub dalam perlembagaan. Ini termasuklah sistem pengasingan kuasa yang secara jelas menggariskan pengasingan di antara kuasa eksekutif, kehakiman dan juga perundangan. Sejajar dengan itu adalah penting untuk kita mengiktiraf sidang bawah pokok yang berlangsung pada 3hb Mac 2009 serta segala resolusi yang diluluskan pada hari tersebut.
Bagi menyelesaikan kemelut politik di Negeri Perak, Pakatan Rakyat tuntas dengan tuntutan agar Dewan Undangan Negeri dibubarkan serta merta. Ini membolehkan rakyat menentukan kerajaan mana yang memperolehi mandat serta kepercayaan mereka melalui pilihanraya yang bakal diadakan nanti.
Kami yakin rakyat pasti memilih yang terbaik buat masa depan mereka dan negara ini. Sepanjang kemelut di Perak, Pakatan Rakyat menunjukkan iltizam untuk tetap teguh menjunjung Keluhuran Perlembagaan serta konsisten membawa Perubahan.
ANWAR IBRAHIM KETUA PEMBANGKANG DEWAN RAKYAT MALAYSIA
Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak today called on the people of Perak to remain calm and not get overexcited with the court’s decision.
“We will solve the problem,” he told reporters in Putrajaya.
The premier, who masterminded the February political coup, added that Barisan Nasional would file an appeal as soon as possible, “probably tomorrow”.
Well, it is indeed their right to file an appeal.
The only thing we can say conclusively about this is that Najib is foregoing the opportunity to take the view that elections here and now are indeed the best way forward.
In other words, Najib still wants to see Zambry govern the state of Perak. The only possible ‘positive’ interpretation is that Najib is still reserving his right to call for snap elections at a later date.
But I’m sure most will agree that this is a ridiculous assumption. There is zero to gain from having elections later but not now. By far the more reasonable interpretation is that this appeal signals Najib’s intention to hold power in Perak for as long as possible without elections.
If there were even an iota of sincerity in Najib’s talk of finding a solution together, the neutral and only ethically sound option of having snap elections would have prevailed.
By foregoing this, Najib’s character is on display for the world to see.
“We will solve the problem.”
Mr. PM, unless there is an option I have overlooked, it is clear that there are extremely limited solutions to this problem.
Either BN illegitimately runs the state without elections, PR runs the state without elections, or the assembly is dissolved. Najib himself has rejected the idea of a unity government, which I think is wise given it would never work.
I enthusiastically invite any single soul to offer a plausible option that has not been expanded upon. Any way out that has yet to be explored.
To me, there will ever remain only one - one I am absolutely convinced any objective person with no vested interest will agree is reasonable: return the democratic right of the people and let them choose their government through free and fair elections now.
If I had to guess, I assume the palace will not be inclined to grant a dissolution either.
I understand that all sorts of traps can be laid out by BN at this juncture. The nearness of this date to an anniversary of one of Malaysia’s darkest days, a day that led to an Emergency, is not lost on me.
Nonetheless, my present view is that without some sort of concentrated mass action - instead of the scattered, piecemeal movements so far that have not expanded much beyond the same old faces - will be required to bring pressure to bear on the decision makers.
Of course, if the Sultan decides tomorrow morning to dissolve the assembly, then Daulat Tuanku, and Malaysians will finally be able to move on. I’m sure we’ll all be watching closely.
The other question is, are the police going to be all pro-BN?
Pretty damned sneaky, their almost immediate move to surround the state buildings. Oh, but I’m sure it’s just to “protect” Nizar and BN :P :P :)
May 10, 1969: Alliance Party (foreshadow of Barisan Nasional) lost heavily in the general election, surrendering its two-thirds majority in the Parliament, and acceding Kelantan and Penang to the Opposition.
Four decades later, May 10, 2009: KL High Court Judge Justice Abdul Aziz Abd Rahim declared Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin as the rightful menteri besar of Perak. The court also ordered the BN-emplaced menteri besar Dr Zambry and the six executive councillors he had appointed to vacate their office. Quote Malaysiakini:
"He is, and was, at all material times the chief minister of Perak," Abdul Aziz told the court.
Justice Abdul Aziz ruled that that the only way to force the MB to resign is through a vote of no-confidence in the state assembly.
The Justice also passed down an immediate judgment to reject the application by Zambry's lawyers for a stay of execution of the judgment.
With that order, Zambry and the illegally-appointed Excos have to go or they will stand accused of contempt of court.
Significantly too, Justice Abdul Aziz also noted that Perak state legal advisor Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid had erred in his affidavit tendered to the court. "The court cannot accept the state legal advisor's testimony as he seemed to be a partisan witness," he ruled.
Mohd Nizar swiftly urged that Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid be suspended from his post of the state illegal adviser with immediate effect.
May 13, 1969: Politically-motivated blood-sheds plunged Malaysia into a state of emergency that suspended Parliamentary Democracy for two years. It saw the rise of Abdul Razak Hussein, Najib's father, as the Prime Minister, and the embezzlement of Ketuanan Melayu in Malaysian psyche in the last four decades.
Four decades later, May 13, 2009, which is two days from now, and with Razak's son ruling as the current prime minister, will ugly history repeat itself?
The last train
First, legally speaking under the provisions of the Constitution, Zambry has the right to appeal. His Umno lawyers are certainly expected to file in at the Court of Appeal tomorrow morning to obtain a stay of execution of the High Court ruling, and failing which, to appeal against the High Court judgment.
Sensibly speaking, Nizar has about another 20 hours to be the legal menteri besar until the Court of Appeal decides otherwise.
He can use the narrow window to seek the consent of the Sultan to dissolve the state assembly to pave the way for fresh state-wide elections.
However, the Sultan can reject his request, and the BN can still consider calling an emergency assembly sitting to force Nizar’s resignation through a vote of no-confidence.
But, the originally-elected Speaker V. Sivakumar will still be the presiding speaker to suspend the three defected PR state assemblymen to annul BN's so-called 3-seat majority advantage.
Zamry has to abandon further appeals to save the pain of the nation and withdraw himself from operating as the illegally installed menteri besar, and the Sultan has to pave the way for fresh state-wide elections.
Najib and his brother, on their part as the key schemers of the coup-d'etat in Perak, can now seize the god-sent opportunity to leverage the Court's judgment to pepper the 1Malaysia 8th value, I N T E G R I T Y, by acceding to the expectations of the citizenry, and claim that our Judiciary is independent of the Executive, and that the Legislative is an untouchable sanctity of a parliamentary democracy.
More seriously, it's last train for the institution of sultanate to redeem itself from serious miscarriage of its constitutional rights in the recent past.
There doesn't seem to be any two ways about it. Don't even think of placing Perak under the emergency rule. This ain't 1969. Don't!
Prime Minister Taro Aso Cabinet Secretariat 1-6-1 Nagatacho, Chiyoda-ku Tokyo, Japan 100-8968
Dear Prime Minister Taro Aso,
We are writing to you in connection with the grave and worsening humanitarian and human rights situation in northern Sri Lanka. The undersigned nongovernmental organizations call upon Japan to play a more active role in confronting the unfolding catastrophe in what may be the military endgame between the Sri Lankan government and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE).
If the world continues to look away from the suffering of civilians in Sri Lanka, as it has largely done until now, it will be a failure of historic proportions. We believe that Japan, a powerful player on the humanitarian stage and the largest international donor to Sri Lanka, has an important role to play in saving countless civilian lives, as well as to implement aid policies that ensure sustainable peace, human rights and development in Sri Lanka. It is time for Japan to show that it is prepared to shoulder its responsibilities.
Tens of thousands of civilians remain trapped in the so-called “no-fire zone,” where John Holmes, United Nations Under-Secretary-General for humanitarian affairs, warned last month of a “bloodbath.” Each of the undersigned organizations works closely in or on Sri Lanka. Our fact-gathering leaves us convinced that the need for strong action by Japan and other influential nations is more urgent than ever.
According to United Nations statistics, more than 6,000 civilians have died and over 13,000 wounded from the fighting since late January 2009. The International Committee of the Red Cross, which rarely speaks out in public, has called the situation “nothing short of catastrophic.”
The UN Human Rights Council experts dealing with summary executions, right to health, right to food and water and sanitation noted in a joint statement on 8 May that there has been a “dramatic lack of transparency and accountability.”
Philip Alston, UN expert on summary executions, noted that the Sri Lankan Government, “has yet to account for the casualties, or to provide access to the war zone for journalists and humanitarian monitors of any type.”
Both sides in this conflict have shown wanton disregard for human life in violation of international humanitarian law. The LTTE is using civilians as human shields and is forcibly preventing civilians from escaping the conflict zone.
The Sri Lankan government has also committed grave abuses, none of which are excused by its claims that it is fighting terrorism. Its forces in numerous instances have indiscriminately shelled densely populated areas, including hospitals. The government has repeatedly lied to Japan and the United Nations by denying the use of heavy weapons in the no-fire zone.
Meanwhile, the Sri Lankan government has refused access to the conflict-affected areas to the United Nations, impartial humanitarian and human rights organizations and the media. It should be clear that the world needs to know what is actually happening on the ground so that it can prevent abuses and help those in need.
We know that a number of humanitarian agencies share many of the concerns expressed in this letter. For the security of their staff, they are constrained from speaking out publicly on these issues.
We urge Japan to take a more robust stance on the continuing suffering of the civilian population in Sri Lanka than has hitherto been the case. We welcome reports that Yasushi Akashi, Representative of the Government of Japan, recently urged Sri Lankan President Mahinda Rajapaksa to make the safety of trapped civilians the top priority, and we welcome government statements reminding all parties to respect international humanitarian law.
However, much more is needed. UN Security Council resolutions have repeatedly emphasized the importance of the protection of civilians. Resolution 1674 reaffirms the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, which heads of state adopted at the 2005 World Summit. The resolution notes that the targeting of civilians and widespread violations of international humanitarian and human rights law in situations of armed conflict may constitute a threat to international peace and security.
We call upon Japan to support efforts for the Security Council to keep the situation in Sri Lanka under close and regular review and to consider the situation in Sri Lanka formally at the Security Council. Meetings in recent weeks have been held only informally in basement rooms, deliberately kept out of the Council’s main chamber, because of the reluctance of some member states. We believe this must change and formal meetings of the Security Council must be held urgently so that the Council can take the necessary measures to address the humanitarian and human rights crisis.
We urge the Council to call upon the Sri Lankan government to facilitate UN needs assessment, lifting restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid, and ensure access for UN agencies to all government reception and screening points. The Council should make clear that both the government and LTTE would be held accountable for their actions, and create a UN commission of inquiry to examine violations of international humanitarian law by both sides.
We urge Japan to support action at the Security Council in New York, and to support prompt consideration of the situation in Sri Lanka by the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.
The need for action is urgent, ahead of a ministerial-level meeting at the Security Council on May 11. Japan needs to find its voice in international diplomacy as a leading rights-respecting democracy. We hope that Japan will rise to the challenge.
Respectfully yours,
Kenneth Roth Executive director Human Rights Watch
Yvonne Terlingen Head of Amnesty International Office at the United Nations
Dr. Monica Serrano Executive Director Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect
Gareth Evans President and CEO International Crisis Group
PETALING JAYA, 11 May 2009: The Raja Muda of Perak, Raja Nazrin Shah, is empowered by the Perak constitution to decide on a request by the menteri besar to dissolve the state assembly.
Tommy Thomas Constitutional lawyer Tommy Thomas said that Article 15 under Part II of the state constitution stipulated that the regent could be the acting sovereign in the event that the sultan was away for more than 30 days.
"We can safely assume that Sultan Azlan Shah is away, and that Raja Nazrin Shah is acting sovereign when he (Raja Nazrin) opened the state assembly last Thursday (7 May)," Thomas said in a phone interview today.
Thomas added that under Article 17 of the constitution, the regent, when acting as the sovereign, is empowered to exercise all the prerogatives and perform all the duties of the sovereign.
"This means that Raja Nazrin Shah can make the decision about dissolving the state assembly as provided under Article 36(2) of the Perak state constitution," he said.
Earlier today, the High Court ruled that Pakatan Rakyat's Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin was the rightful menteri besar of Perak, providing some relief to more than three months of uncertainty as to who should head the state government.
A jubilant Nizar, who was in court today, told reporters he would immediately return to Ipoh to seek an audience with Perak Ruler Sultan Azlan Shah for a dissolution of the state assembly.
However, it is believed that the sultan is currently overseas, and Nizar will probably seek an audience with the Raja Nazrin Shah tomorrow morning in Kuala Kangsar.
Raja Nazrin Shah Nizar was ousted after the Barisan Nasional (BN)'s Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir was sworn in as Perak menteri besar on 6 Feb following the BN takeover of the state government. The takeover was precipitated by the defection of three Pakatan Rakyat (PR) assemblypersons who opted to become BN-friendly independents, leading to the PR losing its majority in the state assembly.
Nizar had sought an audience with the sultan of Perak on 5 May to request the dissolution of the state assembly but was turned down and instead ordered to step down as MB.
On 13 Feb, Nizar, 52, filed an application to the court for a declaration that he was at all material times the menteri besar of Perak. He also sought a declaration that Zambry had no right to hold the office of menteri besar.
Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has said that the BN will appeal against the High Court's decision.
Nizar hugs his wife Datin Seri Fatimah Taat after the court decision today
KUALA LUMPUR, 11 May 2009: The Kuala Lumpur High Court today ruled that Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin is the rightful menteri besar of Perak, providing some relief to more than three months of uncertainty as to who should head the state government.
High Court (Appellate and Special Powers Division) judge Datuk Abdul Aziz Abd Rahim, said the menteri besar can only be dismissed by a no-confidence motion in the state legislative assembly.
"The stark fact is, there never was any vote of no-confidence taken in the legislative assembly.
"So how could one say that the applicant (Nizar) had ceased to command the majority confidence? Evidence as to the loss of confidence was taken from various sources and not a vote in the assembly," said Abdul Aziz.
Abdul Aziz, in his decision on the judicial review application filed by Nizar, also ruled that there was no vacancy in the menteri besar post.
"I am of the view that the office of the menteri besar of Perak has never become vacant or been vacated.
"Only in this manner (a vote of no-confidence) can the menteri besar be forced to resign."
Nizar was ousted after Barisan Nasional (BN)'s Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir was sworn in as Perak menteri besar on 6 Feb following the BN takeover of the state government. The takeover was percipitated by the defection of three Pakatan Rakyat (PR) assemblypersons who opted to become BN-friendly independents, leading to PR losing its majority in the state assembly.
Nizar, who had sought an audience with the sultan of Perak on 5 May to request the dissolution of the state assembly but was turned down and instead ordered to step down as MB, filed suit against Zambry.
On 13 Feb, Nizar, 52, filed an application to the court for a declaration that he is at all material times the menteri besar of Perak. He also sought a declaration that Zambry has no right to hold the office of menteri besar.
MB "cannot be dismissed by sultan"
In his judgment, Abdul Aziz said the democratic thing for BN to have done after it secured the majority in the state assembly was to have requested the Perak Ruler to summon a special sitting for the assembly to pass a no-confidence vote on Nizar.
"Why didn't the BN [do this]? This would have been in accordance with the democratic process," Abdul Aziz said.
The judge said Article 16(7) of the state constitution state that the menteri besar did not hold office at the pleasure of the sultan, and only executive councillors did. As such, the MB could not be dismissed from office by the sultan.
He said the court was not disputing the sultan's prerogative to appoint an MB and to withhold consent to a dissolution request.
However, Abdul Aziz said once the MB was appointed, he was answerable to the legislative assembly "and no one else".
He said that Article 16(6) "was plain and clear" that it did not provide for the dismissal of the MB. This provision had been used by Zambry's counsel to argue that Nizar had lost the majority confidence when he sought the sultan's consent for dissolution.
Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution states that: "If the menteri 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."
Abdul Gani Patail (Source: agc.gov.my) Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, who was an intervener in the case for Zambry, had argued during the hearing that Nizar should have automatically resigned after the sultan had personally met the three independents to ascertain that BN had the majority numbers in the House.
Abdul Aziz said he agreed with Nizar's contention that he sought dissolution based on Article 36(2) of the state constitution, and not because he lost the majority confidence. Article 36(2) gives the sultan the power to summon the assembly, dissolve or prorogue it.
The judge also disagreed with Abdul Gani that the sultan was limited to dissolving the assembly under two circumstances — when the House reaches the end of its five-year term, and when the menteri besar loses the majority confidence.
"It is up to the menteri besar to choose his time to make the request (for dissolution). Once the request is made, it is up to His Royal Highness," Abdul Aziz said.
The judge also questioned the impartiality of state legal adviser Ahmad Kamal, who had submitted an affidavit to back Zambry's application.
Under cross-examination, Ahmad Kamal has said he was "instructed" by Zambry's counsel to submit the affidavit, which Abdul Aziz took as a sign that the state legal adviser was not completely neutral.
Abdul Aziz said a precedent had already been set by the Sarawak High Court in 1966 in Stephen Kalong Ningkan vs Tun Abang Haji Openg and Tawi Sli, whereby the Governor could not dismiss the chief minister and could not appoint a second CM while there was still one in office. The court had ruled that the only way for a CM to be dismissed was by way of a vote in the Council Negri.
Sulaiman AbdullahAfter the decision was announced, Zambry's lead counsel Datuk Cecil Abraham immediately applied for a stay of execution of the High Court's decision in order to file an appeal. However, Abdul Aziz rejected the verbal application for a stay, and asked Cecil to file a formal application. Zambry himself was not present in court today.
Zambry's lawyers want a stay to the court's declaration today in order to file for an appeal of the High Court decision.
Nizar's lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah said the stay should not be granted as the Perak constitutional crisis needed to be resolved urgently. "Allowing a stay would only let it fester."
Meanwhile in PUTRAJAYA, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said the BN will appeal against the Kuala Lumpur High Court's decision, probably by tomorrow.
"We feel we have a strong case," he told Bernama after meeting Pemudah, the Special Task Force to Facilitate Business, at his office, here.
Asked what happens in Perak between now and pending the appeal, Najib said: "We must have a date [to appeal], probably tomorrow."
He called on the people in that state to remain calm and not get too excited with the latest development.
"Victory for the people"
As Abdul Aziz left the courtroom, a jubilant Nizar told reporters that he would immediately return to Ipoh to seek an audience with Perak Ruler Sultan Azlan Shah for a dissolution of the state assembly. However, it is believed that Sultan Azlan Shah is currently overseas, and that Nizar will probably seek an audience with the Regent Raja Nazrin Shah tomorrow morning in Kuala Kangsar.
"This is consonant with justice. This is the rule of law. It's a victory for the people of Malaysia who love democracy."
Nizar described Abdul Aziz as "a brave and courageous judge".
He also released a prepared press statement asking Zambry and the six executive councillors to vacate their posts with immediate effect in compliance with the court order.
Nizar also said that state legal adviser, Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, is suspended with immediate effect. He also plans to call an exco meeting as soon as possible.
Additionally, Nizar's statement also said that all previous decisions made by Zambry and his exco were now subject to review (by the Pakatan Rakyat state government), although not to be invalidated until further notice.
However, the 7 May sitting in which the BN assemblypersons and independents had voted out speaker V Sivakumar and installed Datuk R Ganesan as new speaker, is not subject to review as it is considered illegal, Nizar said.
Decision hailed by PR
Numerous political party leaders also voiced their support for the High Court's decision.
In a media statement, Opposition Leader and PKR adviser Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim hailed the decision, saying it is "a victory for the rakyat and also the country's democratic system."
He said the decision "proved that the Federal Constitution is the highest law in the country," and that it is important for all government institutions to respect this.
"This includes the doctrine of separation of powers which clearly separates executive, judiciary and legislative powers," he said.
Anwar further said, "In line with this, it is important to recognise the 3 March 2009 assembly sitting under the tree and all resolutions passed on that day."
Anwar also called for fresh elections in Perak.
Lim (Pic by Roman888) In PENANG, Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng said the decision as "momentous" and "a victory for the people of Perak, democracy and justice".
He said in a statement that DAP reiterated its call for "an immediate dissolution of the Perak state assembly" and "fresh elections to allow the rakyat the right to choose their own government".
DAP Socialist Youth national chairperson and MP for Rasah, Loke Siew Fook, said in a statement, "This judgment proves that Pakatan Rakyat's efforts to uphold the rule of law and the democratic institution in this crisis have been vindicated."
He too added that a dissolution of the assembly and fresh elections were the "best way out of this crisis".
Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) Member of Parliament for Kulim-Bandar Baru Zulkifli Noordin said in his statement, "I hope this time the sultan will respect the provisions and spirit of the laws and accept this advice by calling for an immediate dissolution of the Perak state assembly."
Meanwhile, Gerakan national youth deputy chairperson Oh Tong Keong urged Perak BN to respect the court's decision.
"The best course of action is for Nizar and Zambry to advise the Sultan of Perak to dissolve the state assembly and pave the way for new elections so the people of Perak have the final say on who should lead them," Oh said.
Oh also said that Perak BN should not call for a stay of execution as it would "create the impression that the BN is hungry for power".
In another statement, however, Malaysian Bar Council chairperson Ragunath Kesavan said in response to the High Court's decision: "The answer ultimately does not lie in the courts."
"No doubt Zambry will now appeal this decision to the Court of Appeal, and further legal arguments will be advanced," he said.
"Whichever side loses at the Court of Appeal will then appeal to the Federal Court — the issue will go on and on," he continued.
To avoid such legal wrangling, Ragunath said, "Both sides of the political divide must now realise that power has to be returned to where it rightly belongs — in the hands of the people, the electorate of the state of Perak."
Court cases related to the 2009 Perak constitutional crisis
Plaintiff vs defendant
Matter
Status / Court / Decision
Ruled in PR's favour
1
Nizar vs Zambry
To determine rightful Perak MB.
High Court decision on 11 May 2009: Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin is the rightful menteri besar of Perak.
2
Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi, Mohd Osman Jailu and Hee Yit Foong (3 Aduns) vs Speaker V Sivakumar
A declaration that the plaintiffs have not resigned as elected representatives.
Federal Court decision on 10 April 2009: Plaintiffs have not resigned, remain as Aduns.
3
Zambry and 6 Others (excos) vs Sivakumar and state assembly
Among others, a declaration that the speaker's suspension of MB Zambry and six exco are invalid.
Injunction to prevent speaker from holding unlawful meetings.
Federal Court decision on 16 April: Speaker's decision to suspend Zambry and six others was null and void. No ruling on other applications.
Ipoh High Court decision on 3 March: Injunction granted in the afternoon preventing speaker from holding unlawful meetings. Injunction was not retrospective and did not cover the 3 March sitting under the tree in the morning.
4
Sivakumar vs state legal adviser
An order that the state legal adviser had no instructions to represent the speaker.
Court of Appeal decision on 13 March 2009: Speaker is allowed to choose and appoint his own lawyers.
5
Sivakumar vs Election Commission, Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi, Mohd Osman Jailu and Hee Yit Foong
To rule whether the EC has the right to declare vacancy status of state seats.
Federal Court decision on 9 April 2009: Yes, EC has the right to determine if a state seat is vacant, not the speaker.
6
Chen Fook Chye, Tai Sing Ng and Sivanesan (excos), and Ahmad Sabry, Abdul Latif and Foo Hon Wai (voters) vs EC and three independent Aduns
Judicial review of EC’s decision not to hold fresh elections for three vacant seats.
KUALA LUMPUR, May 11 — Pakatan Rakyat’s Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin is the real mentri besar of Perak , the Kuala Lumpur High Court decided today.
Judge Datuk Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim said in his ruling: “The only way to force the MB to resign is through a vote of no confidence that must be taken in the state legislative assembly.”
The High Court also rejected an appeal from Barisan Nasional’s (BN) Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir for a stay of the declaration.
Nizar is now on the way to Ipoh to seek an audience with the Perak Sultan to ask for consent to dissolve the state assembly.
Manoharan with Speaker Teng Chang Khim earlier today after Teng welcomed the Kota Alam Shah assemblyman to the Selangor Legislative Assembly. — Picture by Choo Choy May
By Neville Spykerman- The Malaysian Insider
SHAH ALAM, May 11 — After a 14-month long wait, M. Manoharan finally set foot inside the Selangor Legislative Assembly.
Manoharan, who was detained under the Internal Security Act (ISA) for 514 days in Kamunting, was shown to his seat by Speaker Teng Chang Khim this morning.
However, the Kota Alam Shah assemblyman who was elected while under detention, will have to wait for the next sitting of the house in July to take part in debates.
“I’ve only dreamed of this moment and now I am here.” said the first-term state lawmaker.
Manoharan said the government had disrespected the 12,699 voters who voted for him by not releasing him earlier and lashed out at authorities who labelled him a terrorist to justify his prolonged detention.
Man of the moment... M.Manoharan speaks while being looked on by those attending his visit to the state assembly. - Picture by Choo Choy May
He said the tipping point which finally forced the government to release him was his threat to resign his state seat.
“I believe any BN candidate who stood for the by-election would have made history by losing their deposit.”
He added that he would not comply with the restriction of his movements as imposed by police.
He said it was unconstitutional for him to have to inform the police he was leaving Klang just to come to Shah Alam. “I was never a treat to national security to begin with so there is no reason for the police to restrict my movements.”
Teng added that Manoharan was only fulfilling his duties as an assemblyman.
He said a restriction order needed to be obtained from the courts. “Manoharan is an elected representative and not a criminal. If he is a criminal, the police should obtain a restriction order.”
Teng added that Manoharan was one of four Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers in the House who are former ISA detainees. The others are Teresa Kok (Kinrara), Dr Mohd Nasir Hashim (Kota Damansara) and Saari Sungib (Hulu Klang).
“This is not a record of distinction because it’s proof the country is haunted by cruel laws.”
Teng said he was relieved that Manoharan had finally been released because he is the most senior lawyer in the legislature.
“He is even more senior (in legal practice) than me and he can contribute much to the House.”
Waytha Moorthy to return to Malaysia with or without any Government assurance or condition
I have decided to return to Malaysia now since the HINDRAF lawyers have been released.
When the tsunami of November 25, 2007 took place, HINDRAF was still in its infancy in addressing the plight of the Malaysian Indians. The arrest of the HINDRAF leaders was meant to curtail its legitimate concerns for the Malaysian Indians and allow it to be a lost cause for them.
As the chairman of HINDRAF, at that juncture, I decided that somehow, HINDRAF concerns needs to be brought in light in the international arena since the local government had used oppression towards the publicand the operation of the ISA to stifle and vilify the voice of HINDRAF.
As such I had left to UK to continue its struggle and keep the movement alive and bearing the international support that HINDRAF was getting from various international bodies and governments, theMalaysian government subsequently revoked my passport and forced me to seek asylum which the British government granted bearing the fear of persecution faced by me from the authorities in Malaysia for upholding truth and just cause for the Malaysian Indians.
Now that my comrades have been released, I have decided that I shall return to Malaysia to continue and forge ahead with the objectives and goals of HINDRAF in seeking what it had originally set out to even at the risk of me being arrested under ISA or any other repressive Laws.
I shall return knowing the risks involved, as I honestly believe that HINDRAF cause was just and fair. I had sought the advise of many grass root supporters and they are in the opinion that I should not return as I would be arrested and incarcerated.
This does not fear me anymore as the objective to obtain the release of the HINDRAF lawyers had been achieved and now it is the time to press forward with the objectives for the community that has been systematically discriminated, marginalized and sidelined for 52 years.
HINDRAF is now a strong mass movement and can never be suppressed any further. If the government arrests me or detains me, there will be many others within the community with conscience who will spearhead the struggle for the betterment of the society and the nation. The spirit of HINDRAF invoked within the Malaysian community is inerasable, and I can only hope for the betterment of the nation and a fast evolving universe in its struggle for equality, fairness and justice will prevail over selfishness and ignorance.
I rest my faith in DESTINY and its people, as HINDRAF is an organization that dared to be different, dared to go right to the core problem to tackle the issues rather than appeasing institutions for piecemeal offers for the betterment of the nation.
MAY 11 — Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu atau Pekembar atau hari ini dikenali sebagai Umno, lahir pada 11 Mei, 1946, susulan daripada gerakan penjajahan Inggeris ketika itu yang berhasrat untuk memperkenalkan Malayan Union, yang akan menghapuskan hak keistimewaan bangsa Melayu, sebagai bangsa peribumi Tanah Melayu.
Nama pemimpin Melayu agung seperti Datuk Onn Jaafar, Datuk Panglima Bukit Gantang, Abdul Wahab Abdul Aziz, Datuk Nik Ahmad Kamil, Datuk Hamzah Abdullah dan Pendeta Zainal Abidin Ahmad (Zaaba), adalah orang kuat dipilih untuk menyediakan draf Piagam atau Perlembagaan Umno.
Kita perlu mengimbau sejarah penubuhan Umno yang lahir atas kesedaran dan kehendak perwakilan yang menghadiri Kongres Melayu SeTanah Melayu pertama pada 14 Mac, 1946.
Setahun sebelum itu, iaitu selepas tentera Jepun menyerah kalah pada 14 Ogos 1945, Kerajaan Britain menghantar tenteranya untuk menguasai semula Semenanjung Tanah Melayu dan serentak itu membawa perubahan radikal terhadap pemerintahan negeri-negeri Melayu.
Menerusi tipu helah Britain, Raja-Raja Melayu dipengaruhi supaya menandatangani perjanjian dengan Sir Harold MacMichael bagi menyerahkan kuasa pemerintahan serta kedaulatan kepada Kerajaan Britain.
Rancangan Malayan Union cadangan Britain itu hanya membabitkan Negeri-Negeri Selat, tidak termasuk Singapura akan mewujudkan Majlis Perundangan dan Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan yang diketuai seorang Gabenor Inggeris.
Sultan-Sultan Melayu masih mengekalkan kedudukan masing-masing, tetapi dalam bidang kuasa yang terhad kepada agama Islam dan adat istiadat orang Melayu. Sebaliknya, Britain akan terus memerintah melalui sebuah majlis penasihat yang diluluskan seorang Gabenor Malayan Union.
Perkara paling menaik kemarahan Melayu ialah cadangan undang-undang baru yang memberikan kewarganegaraan kepada semua orang yang dilahirkan di Tanah Melayu dan Singapura, serta pendatang yang sudah menetap sekurang-kurangnya 10 tahun daripada 15 tahun, sebelum 15 Februari 1942.
Semua warga negara Malayan Union yang baru itu akan mempunyai hak yang sama, termasuk penerimaan masuk untuk perkhidmatan awam. Akhir sekali, kewarganegaran Tanah Melayu diberikan kepada semua tanpa diskriminasi kaum. Hak ini dikenali sebagai ‘jus soli’.
Justeru, apabila cadangan Malayan Union diumumkan di Parlimen British pada 10 Oktober 1945, bangsa Melayu dari Perlis hingga ke Singapura, bersatu dan membantah dengan lantang cadangan penjajah ini.
Satu perhimpunan besar-besaran yang pertama diadakan di Kelab Sultan Sulaiman, Kuala Lumpur pada 1 hingga 4 Mac 1946. Ketetapan dipersetujui di kongres itu ialah menubuhkan Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu atau Umno; membantah penubuhan Malayan Union dan mengadakan derma pelajaran kebangsaan Melayu.
Suatu Jawatankuasa ditubuhkan untuk menyediakan Piagam atau Perlembagaan Pertubuhan Kebangsaan Melayu Bersatu (Pekembar) atau Umno dan perlembagaan itu diterima oleh perhimpunan yang bersidang di Johor Bahru pada 11 Mei 1946.
Tarikh itu perlu diingati seluruh bangsa Melayu kerana ia adalah tarikh yang mana Umno dilahirkan dengan rasminya dan menjadi parti politik pertama membangkang penubuhan Malayan Union.
Pemimpin Umno berjaya menasihatkan Sultan-Sultan Melayu supaya tidak menghadiri upacara pelantikan Gabenor Malayan Union yang pertama, Sir Edward Gent dan secara simbolik memanifestasikan kemarahan dan bangkangan orang Melayu terhadap Malayan Union.
Dua bulan selepas wujudnya Malayan Union, Kerajaan Britain mengubah pendirian dan bersedia mengadakan perbincangan dengan wakil Umno dan Sultan bagi mewujudkan satu Kerajaan Persekutuan baru.
Rundingan ini berlangsung hingga 21 Januari 1948 apabila Perjanjian Persekutuan Tanah Melayu ditandatangani Raja-Raja Melayu dengan wakil Kerajaan Britain yang mengembalikan semula kuasa dan kedaulatan Sultan.
Secara rasmi Persekutuan Tanah Melayu dilahirkan pada 1 Februari 1948.
Enam puluh tiga tahun sudah berlalu, pemimpin Umno datang dan pergi silih berganti. Kepemimpinan tertinggi bermula daripada Datuk Onn Jaafar, Allahyarham Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj, Allahyarham Tun Abdul Razak Hussein, Allahyarham Tun Hussein Onn, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi dan terkini, Datuk Seri Najib Razak.
Peredaran zaman terasa begitu pantas; generasi kepemimpinan Umno sudah berubah. Umno juga sudah mengadakan perubahan mengenai peredaran masa. Bagaimanapun, perjuangan untuk memartabatkan bangsa Melayu dan memastikan bangsa peribumi ini dapat berdiri sama tinggi dan duduk sama rendah dengan bangsa lain, terus menjadi tonggak perjuangan parti.
Selepas lahir kerana kemelut Malayan Union yang mencemarkan kedaulatan Sultan-Sultan Melayu dan menghapuskan hak keistimewaan bangsa Melayu, Umno meneruskan perjuangan Melayu dengan pengenalan Dasar Ekonomi Baru (DEB) selepas tragedi rusuhan kaum terburuk pada 13 Mei, 1969.
Dasar ini digantikan dengan Dasar Pembangunan Nasional (DPN) pada 1991. Janji kerajaan yang diterajui Umno, walaupun keistimewaan untuk Bumiputera masih wujud, namun ia akan diganti secara beransur-ansur apabila kita sudah mempunyai keyakinan diri.
Tidak pernah dalam sebarang dasar yang digaris Umno, sebagai tonggak kepada kepemimpinan Barisan Nasional (BN) yang turut dianggotai komponen parti pelbagai kaum, membelakangkan kepentingan bangsa lain.
Cuma satu pinta parti ini ialah jangan dipertikai keistimewaan yang memang menjadi hak Melayu yang sudah termaktub di dalam Perlembagaan Negara kerana ialah adalah hak peribumi yang akan dipertahan sampai bila-bila.
Bagaimanapun, perkembangan menarik berlaku dalam kepemimpinan terbaru Umno hari ini.
Presiden Umno ketujuh dan Perdana Menteri Keenam, Najib menyediakan perancangan yang bakal mengubah struktur pemerintahan dan organisasi Umno yang bakal membuka pintu seluas-luasnya kepada proses demokrasi yang menjadi pegangan generasi baru hari ini.
Pilihan Raya Umum Ke-12 memberi tamparan hebat kepada Umno dan BN. Barisan kepemimpinan baru Najib mengakui kelemahan diri; sama ada bagi pihak Umno mahupun BN.
Perkara pertama yang dilakukan Presiden Umno yang baru memerintah selama 40 hari ini ialah menyatukan semua puak dalaman, sama ada kawan mahupun lawan politiknya serta mendesak barisan kepemimpinannya mengkaji kelemahan yang ada.
Arahan pertama Najib ialah mengkaji perubahan sistem pemilihan dalaman parti dan memastikan ia dibuka sehingga ke akar umbi. Justeru, tidak ada tarikh lebih sesuai untuk seluruh ahli Umno untuk melakukan muhasabah diri, selain daripada 11 Mei, tarikh lahirnya parti keramat untuk seluruh bangsa Melayu.
“Jika kita tidak berubah, kita akan rebah.” Amaran Najib kepada seluruh barisan kepemimpinan baru Umno pada mesyuarat majlis tertinggi pertamanya, baru-baru ini. Ia sekali gus adalah amaran kepada seluruh bangsa Melayu, untuk survival masa depan. — Berita Harian
MAY 11 — The current political paralysis in Perak reflects the major failures of our key institutions. It is a total breakdown at the palace, the legislature, and the permanent establishment.
It also exposes the glaring inadequacies of the judicial system which has yet to adjudicate this critical and urgent matter of state.
It is not however, the failure of the people, as some pundits have implied by quoting the old adage that we deserve the government we get.
It is the voters’ prerogative whether to grant the incumbent party a stunning victory, humble it with an unstable slim majority, or even throw it into the ranks of the opposition. Canada and Italy have a long history of minority governments, and they have managed well.
A mark of a mature democracy, or any system for that matter, is the transfer of power from one entity to another smoothly and predictably. Perak is a spectacular failure; it is also a preview for Malaysia.
Perak is one of three state governments that changed hands as a consequence of the 2008 general elections. In the other two, Kedah and Penang, the transition went much smoother. There were hiccups of course, like the destruction of state documents and the dissolution of legislators’ wives’ club in Selangor, for example.
That reflected more infantile behaviours than institutional failure. Why Perak should be the exception merits careful consideration.
We used to assume that if only we could get qualified and experienced people, then no matter how battered or inadequate our institutions, those people would rise up to the challenge.
In Perak, we have a sultan who by any measure is the most qualified and experienced, having served as the nation’s top judge for many years. Yet his decision in this critical matter, which demanded the most judicious of judgment, proved to be unwise and precipitous. And that is putting it mildly.
This is not hindsight. Even at the time when he made that pivotal decision (which was the singular event that triggered developments which culminated in the spectacle of May 7), the voice of the people was loud and clear.
Only that the sultan refused to hear or chose to ignore it. No amount of subsequent royal pontifications will ever rectify or justify this error. Only a reversal of that earlier erroneous decision would.
It was too bad that Sultan Azlan Shah deputised his Raja Muda to the May 7th opening of the legislature.
While that may have spared the sultan the spectacle and embarrassment of being physically entrapped by the bedlam, he missed a splendid opportunity to witness firsthand what his modern-day version of hulubalangs was up to!
Instead it was his Raja Muda who was left to cool his heels for a good six hours! Well, let us hope that at least it was an edifying experience for him.
It was nonetheless pathetic to see the Raja Muda reduced to pleading for respect for his speech! Few, not even the normally pliant mainstream media, bothered to carry his speech in full. So much for the respect that he desperately sought!
Amazingly in his speech, the Raja Muda did not deem it important or necessary to comment on the ugly spectacle he had just witnessed and been a part of. He remained aloof and strangely uncurious.
He must have been in temporary suspended animation, oblivious of his immediate surroundings, during his six-hour wait. He was from another planet, earlier programmed to deliver his royal speech and then leave! Nothing more; for that you would have to re-programme him again!
The principal political protagonists here were Barisan Nasional’s Datuk Seri Dr Zamry Kadir, a Temple University PhD, and Pakatan’s Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin, a professional engineer fluent in multiple languages.
Then there was the Speaker of the House, A. Sivakumar, a lawyer by profession. Their impressive diplomas and credentials meant nothing; they only looked impressive when framed and hanged on their office walls.
Instead of being the stabilising force and buffering factor, the permanent establishment, from the state secretary to the state legal advisor and the chief of police, was hopelessly ensnared in the mess through their highly partisan performances. They rapidly degenerated to being part of the problem (and a very significant one at that) instead of the solution.
As for the judiciary, it failed to appreciate the urgency and gravity of the crisis. Thus the case did not merit an expedited hearing and left to meander through the usual slow judicial pathway.
By contrast, the 2000 American elections that saw the Florida ballot counts being litigated, the case ended up at the Supreme Court for a definitive decision in a matter of days, not months.
Lessons Learned
Thanks to modern technology, those who were not there in Ipoh could still follow the unfolding events in real time, trumping the severe censorship machinery of the government. Not that it was ever effective, just like the rest of the government.
Unfortunately there is not much that we could learn from the sorry spectacle. Even to declare that it reflected the sorry state of our institutions would be inadequate. Besides, we already have too many affirmations of that sad reality.
The next reflex reaction would be to declare, “Everyone is to be blamed!” While that is an understandable response, it does not solve anything, for the corollary to that statement would be that no one is to be blamed. That would be a cop out; we are all not equally culpable.
Everyone in the chain of events could have stopped if not reversed the destructive sequence right up to the day before the infamous debacle at the legislature. Failing that, the buck must and should stop somewhere. In our system, the buck stops at the highest level, the palace.
Consider the chain of events again. First there were those renegade legislators switching party affiliations. No law against that; it was their choice. Perhaps that would galvanise the leaders of the party they had deserted to do a better job of screening and scrutinising their future candidates.
Maybe primary elections among party members (as in America) instead of a decision from headquarters would produce better and more reliable candidates. That certainly would be a useful lesson.
However, this being Malaysia, things get more interesting. It turned out that those turncoats were earlier being investigated for corruption. Miraculously after their switchover, the charges were not pursued! So far no journalist has any thought of following that lead.
Even if those characters were pure, their switching over should never have triggered such a mess. Surely they could wait till the next sitting of the legislature to introduce whatever vote of no confidence they may have in mind of the leadership, and thus bring down the sitting government in the traditional and only legitimate way.
Even if leaders of the Barisan coalition were to petition the sultan to dismiss the sitting Chief Minister (which they did), the sultan ought to first also hear out the incumbent before making a decision. Common sense dictates that.
One does not have to be a judge or have read the weighty tomes of legal luminaries to appreciate that elementary dictum. Hear both sides before rendering a decision! Even a new father knows that.
Sultan Azlan Shah cannot pretend to be able to read or predict the thinking of his legislators after only a few moments of “chat” under the most severe royal protocol at the palace. That would be the height of royal arrogance. In any other circumstance, decisions made under such surroundings could be considered as coerced.
Besides, it is their collective judgment expressed openly in a properly convened legislative forum that matters. Not only could you not predict individual behaviours, you could never foretell the group dynamics and the final collective decision.
If our political leaders make a mistake, they are held accountable. Just ask Abdullah Badawi. The buck with the present imbroglio stops at the palace, with Sultan Azlan Shah.
Unfortunately in our system at present, there is no effective system of checks and balances with respect to our monarchs, both at the state as well as federal levels. They are also immune to prosecution in the conduct of their official duties.
There is no mechanism to fire or censure them. The Special Tribunal is only for prosecuting their personal misconduct. Well, at least that is a beginning, a measure of some accountability.
Regardless whether we have an effective system of checks and balances with respect to the sultans, our society has irreversibly changed. The old feudal order is now gone, for good, and never to return. Get used to it! In today’s world, the people is sovereign. Just ask the descendents of the late Shah Pahlavi and King Farouk, or closer to home, the Sultan of Sulu.
I tried to convey this in my poem, Makna Merdeka 50 (Meaning of Merdeka 50), I wrote to commemorate our 50th year of independence. I quote a couple of stanzas:
Rakyat negri bukan nya kuli
Untok di kerah ka sana sini
Zaman purba tak akan kembali
Mungkin menteri di buang negri!
Renungkan nasib si Idi Amin
Yang Shah Pahlavi pun tak terjamin
Pemimpin negri mesti meninggati
Rakyat – bukan Raja – yang di daulati!
(Blessed with freedom and reason are God’s children/To lords and kings we are not beholden/The feudal order has long been toppled/Let’s be clear, the sovereign is the people!
Ponder the fate of one Idi Amin/That of Shah Pahlavi was equally grim!/Those realities our leaders must heed/“Power to the people!” is the new creed.)
That in essence is the pertinent lesson from Perak. — limkitsiangblog
KUALA LUMPUR, May 11 — Call it a softening of the Barisan Nasional position in Perak but Datuk Seri Najib Razak and other senior ruling coalition politicians appear to be coming around to an unmistakable conclusion: that the present situation in the state is untenable.
The prime minister knows that though Barisan Nasional is in control of the state legislative assembly, the fallout from the power grab could have a negative impact on beyond Perak, rocking even his 1Malaysia platform and puncturing his position that a leader of the country must rise above politics.
That is why Najib put forward the possibility of BN and Pakatan Rakyat working together to resolve the Perak question. He cannot be seen to be giving up the state.
So the PM will approach the Opposition and ask them to put forward their proposals on how to move forward in Perak. There will not be a coalition government but the BN may offer certain positions in the state to Opposition politicians.
If as expected Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin and his comrades in Pakatan Rakyat insist on the state assembly being dissolved and fresh elections called, expect the BN to walk away and turn the signpost to the royal town of Kuala Kangsar.
The Malaysian Insider has learnt that senior BN officials are taking the approach that it is for Sultan Azlan Shah to decide if the state assembly should be dissolved, and fresh state elections called.
“The Sultan used his discretion in February to install BN as the government after accepting that we had the majority in the House. The BN did not force the Sultan to make that choice but yet BN and the PM have been blamed for the outcome.
“What the BN did was to approach and inform the Sultan that we had the majority in the House. Similarly having all the information before him and after studying the present circumstances, the Sultan can dissolve the House if he believes that it is in the best interest of the people of Perak. Our point is that it is not for Datuk Seri Najib or BN to talk about dissolving the assembly. This is solely up to the Sultan, ‘’ said a government official familiar with the thinking in the administration.
He noted that BN leaders resent talk that they masterminded a power grab, noting that all the ruling coalition did was encourage three Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers who wanted to cross over. Defections are not illegal, he pointed out.
Clearly, there has been a slight shift in BN approach since the fracas in the state assembly on May 7.
The ruling coalition wants to put some daylight between its decision to accept the defectors and the Sultan’s decision to refuse to dissolve the state assembly.
The overwhelming view in Umno/BN is that Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir and BN should not budge one inch in Perak and that by the time general elections are held in three or four years, the anger among Perakians against BN would have dissipated.
Perhaps so but Najib and senior BN officials do not want to take a chance.
That is why the PM softened his position yesterday and offered an olive branch to Pakatan Rakyat. A day earlier he strenuously defended BN’s legitimacy in the state and the actions of BN lawmakers on May 7. He knows that a PM who says he represents all Malaysians cannot afford to ignore that thing called public opinion, regardless of what his party thinks.
This new approach also gives the Sultan of Perak a way out of an episode which has damaged the standing of his household in the eyes of many Malaysians.
KUALA LUMPUR, May 11 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) will discuss the prime minister’s offer of cooperating with Barisan Nasional (BN) to resolve the political crisis in Perak and will try to contact him before Wednesday.
DAP strongman Lim Kit Siang said today that he will discuss with other PR leaders the offer made by Datuk Seri Najib Razak and will then contact the prime minister.
He also said that he should have something to announce on Wednesday evening at the public forum “May 13 to 1Malaysia — Future of Nation Building” to be held at the Petaling Jaya Civics Centre.
The prime minister had ruled out forming a coalition government in Perak to which Lim responded in a statement to the media that PR was not interested in such an arrangement either.
“Nobody is talking about the formation of a coalition government between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat to resolve the three-month-long political and constitutional crisis... but a solution must be found, based on fully respecting the sovereign rights of the voters of Perak to elect the government of their choice — to end the haemorrhage of the credibility and confidence in governance in Perak and Malaysia.”
When contacted by The Malaysian Insider, Lim said that he will be trying to make contact with Najib “hopefully before Wednesay.”
Perak DAP chief, Ngeh Koo Ham said that dissolving the state assembly is the most effective way to end the political crisis in the embattled state but that he is “open to any suggestion that is better.”
He says there has been no contact from BN since Najib made his offer yesterday.
The Perak political scene has been plagued with uncertainty and drama ever since BN engineered a takeover of the state in early February.
The political coup however, was not watertight and left many questioning the legitimacy of its government.
The crisis, now in its fourth month, hit a new low in a public spectacle last Thursday when scuffles broke out inside the state assembly hall and former speaker V. Sivakumar was forcibly dragged from the hall after being ousted by BN.
(The Star) - Hindraf’s legal adviser M. Manoharan denied that he is linked to the Tamil Tigers.
“Ours is a people’s struggle, we are not terrorists and neither are the movement’s main members P. Uthayakumar, P. Waythamoorthy, S. Ganabathi Rao and K. Vasathakumar,” he said.
Manoharan added that his detention over allegations that he was linked to the Liberation of Tamil Tigers of Eelam (LTTE) was absurd.
“Never have I visited Sri Lanka and our movement has no links with the LTTE. It is a figment of the government’s imagination,” he said.
“Accusations like this only fuel our inner strength to fight on to gain freedom for the people,” he said.
Manoharan said he would continue his struggle for a better Malaysia, even if it leads to another arrest under the Internal Security Act that he wants abolished.
From next week, Manoharan would visit his constituents from house to house to thank them for their support and to take care of their problems.
“Being on a conditional release, I have to be within the Klang district and to attend the State Assembly, I will have to inform the state police and go to the district police headquarters on a weekly basis,” he said.
Manoharan said he would be looking for a house in Klang to rent as he currently lives in Puchong.
He said he also needs to catch up with his children, 12-year-old twins Shivaranjini and Hariharan and Ganendra, 10.
Manoharan added that he would have to rebuild his legal career as clients had been referred to others.
As he addressed the people under a tent off Persiaraan Raja Muda Musa here yesterday, three men tried to garland him but he refused. He told the crowd that he refused the gesture as it was a culture of MIC leaders.
After his speech, Manoharan picked up the garland, a move done to not offend the trio, and placed it around his wife S. Pushpaneela’s neck.
Meanwhile, Vasanthakumar, who was also released from ISA detention, said he was resting at home, recuperating from a knee injury.
“I want to spend time with my family first,” he said at his home in Taman Cheras Prima, Kuala Lumpur.
Vasanthakumar said his mother described his release as her best Mother’s Day gift. “I’m glad everything is going on well now.
(The Star) - Kota Alam Shah assemblyman M. Manoharan said he would be filing an RM100mil suit against the Federal Government, the Home Minister and others over his 17-month detention under the Internal Security Act.
The suit will also name the commander of the Kamunting detention centre, the Inspector-General of Police and the Attorney-General, he said outside the Selangor State Assembly Monday.
Manoharan, who was freed over the weekend, said the detention was unlawful and had the deprived Kota Alam Sham constituents of their elected representative.
The legal adviser to the now outlawed Hindu Rights Action Force (Hindraf) movement was detained with other Hindraf leaders in November, 2007. He ran for the state seat in the 12th general election in March last year while in detention.
Manoharan said that he would not be complying with most of the conditions imposed upon him upon his release from the ISA.
Selangor Speaker Teng Chang Khim, who was with him at the press conference at the state secretariat building here Monday, said that the conditions imposed upon Manoharan were not legally binding.
He added that was no restriction order against the assemblyman either.
(Bernama) KUALA LUMPUR: The MIC has invited Hindraf leaders for possible talks and partnership for the sake of the Indian community.
MIC secretary-general Datuk Dr S. Subramaniam said the party was also willing to consider views and suggestions by the movement on ways to alleviate the plight of the community.
He said the MIC was ready to hear suggestions from Hindraf leaders on how they could work together for the benefit of the Indians.
Dr Subramaniam was speaking after officiating at the National Temple Conference here yesterday.
He was commenting on Hindraf founder P. Uthayakumar, who upon his release from detention under the Internal Security Act, said that he would continue to fight for the Indian community, which he alleged was marginalised.
Dr Subramaniam also invited Hindraf leaders to join the party, saying that since both of them shared a common goal of elevating the living standard of the community, they would be able to achieve the objective better if they worked as one.
"I am for a united Indian community, as we can see all the splintering in the group does not help."
On Saturday, Uthayakumar and two other Hindraf leaders, M. Manoharan and K. Vasanthakumar, who were held at the Kamunting detention camp since last year, were freed, along with 10 others detainees.
Asked whether Hindraf leaders might form a political party to serve its cause, as the opposition parties which it was currently allied to had failed them, Dr Subramaniam said: "Now, they are an illegal movement. But nobody can stop them if they want to form a political party, as long as they follow the proper process. The decision is up to the Home Ministry."
They are not doing this with East- timor delegates but it is just piece of low class mentality that they want to show other. This country will appear as Pakistan , Sudan and Somalia one day.
KUALA LUMPUR, May 11 — Call it a softening of the Barisan Nasional position in Perak but Datuk Seri Najib Razak and other senior ruling coalition politicians appear to be coming around to an unmistakable conclusion: that the present situation in the state is untenable.