The country’s top lawyer must explain why Putrajaya is reluctant to declare a state of emergency in areas affected by the current devastating floods, constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari said.
"The Attorney-General (Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail) should come out to explain the issue," he added.
Aziz said the legal provision on emergency in Malaysia was different from that of the United Kingdom or the United States.
In the US, he said it was implied that the executive authority was in the hands of the President while in the UK it was contained in an ordinary legislation.
"In Malaysia, the power to declare a state of emergency is in the Federal Constitution and in the hands of the Yang diPertuan Agong, who normally acts on advice from the Cabinet," Aziz said in a statement.
He said this in response to federal opposition parties, DAP and PAS, which had criticised Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for his failure to declare a state of emergency, especially in Kelantan.
The Universiti Selangor academic said PAS Youth's legal committee had also cited a standard operating procedure (SOP) issued by the National Security Council (NSC) in the event of such disasters.
"But the NSC is just a government agency and the SOP is not even a law, let alone able to take precedence over the Constitution," he added.
Aziz said PAS claimed that the state of emergency that it talked about was not the one under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution.
"Now, who has the authority to say that? How many types of 'state of emergency' are there in Malaysia?" he asked.
PAS Youth legal committee also claimed that the declaration of a state of emergency was crucial in order to allow the use of military assets.
"I think they are wrong. All those assets, including helicopters and ships are all under the control of the government," he said.
On Saturday, Najib had said floods submerged much of Kelantan but insisted that there was no necessity to declare a state of emergency in the northeastern state as insurance companies would be absolved from paying compensation.
"If the government announces an emergency, the implications that will arise include the insurance companies being absolved from paying compensation... and compensation arising from damages to property and vehicles is enormous," he had said.
Aziz said he felt that the government had some good reasons for not declaring a state of emergency as it would not have improved anything.
"Emergency declaration will not stop the rain or will help us with more food or boats," he added.
He said todate, a state of emergency has only been declared once, that is, during the severe haze problem in Sarawak in 1998 but it was not done by the King.– December 29, 2014.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/a-g-should-explain-why-emergency-not-declared-during-floods-says-law-expert#sthash.AQor5wTs.dpuf
"The Attorney-General (Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail) should come out to explain the issue," he added.
Aziz said the legal provision on emergency in Malaysia was different from that of the United Kingdom or the United States.
In the US, he said it was implied that the executive authority was in the hands of the President while in the UK it was contained in an ordinary legislation.
"In Malaysia, the power to declare a state of emergency is in the Federal Constitution and in the hands of the Yang diPertuan Agong, who normally acts on advice from the Cabinet," Aziz said in a statement.
He said this in response to federal opposition parties, DAP and PAS, which had criticised Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak for his failure to declare a state of emergency, especially in Kelantan.
The Universiti Selangor academic said PAS Youth's legal committee had also cited a standard operating procedure (SOP) issued by the National Security Council (NSC) in the event of such disasters.
"But the NSC is just a government agency and the SOP is not even a law, let alone able to take precedence over the Constitution," he added.
Aziz said PAS claimed that the state of emergency that it talked about was not the one under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution."Now, who has the authority to say that? How many types of 'state of emergency' are there in Malaysia?" he asked.
PAS Youth legal committee also claimed that the declaration of a state of emergency was crucial in order to allow the use of military assets.
"I think they are wrong. All those assets, including helicopters and ships are all under the control of the government," he said.
On Saturday, Najib had said floods submerged much of Kelantan but insisted that there was no necessity to declare a state of emergency in the northeastern state as insurance companies would be absolved from paying compensation.
"If the government announces an emergency, the implications that will arise include the insurance companies being absolved from paying compensation... and compensation arising from damages to property and vehicles is enormous," he had said.
Aziz said he felt that the government had some good reasons for not declaring a state of emergency as it would not have improved anything.
"Emergency declaration will not stop the rain or will help us with more food or boats," he added.
He said todate, a state of emergency has only been declared once, that is, during the severe haze problem in Sarawak in 1998 but it was not done by the King.– December 29, 2014.
- See more at: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/malaysia/article/a-g-should-explain-why-emergency-not-declared-during-floods-says-law-expert#sthash.AQor5wTs.dpuf
No comments:
Post a Comment