Copyright Notice

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the author, except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the author, at the address below.

Sakmongkol ak 47

ariff.sabri@gmail.com

Thursday, 14 May 2009

Let the People Decide!


Democracy or political roulette?


Its tweedle-dee, tweedle-dum again. Zambry is not or is? Nizar is or isn't. What has brought this sad state of affairs to Perak? It is politics. The problem we now have in Perak is essentially a political one. It is not an issue of legality. If we allow the courts to decide on what is essentially a political problem, we will continue to have this see-sawing.

What is at stake here is constitional democracy. Democracy as is commonly understood is rule of the people, by the people and for the people. It is a process of getting a government by way of free elections. We may not get the government that we particularly want, but the process of getting it is democratic. Hence a 'bad' government that is cavalierly dismissed by the catechetical 'we get the government we deserve' is useless analytically. What does it mean? It does not conform to a personal catalogue? Unless it's properly analysed, this often snide remark is just what it is- just an cynical oral expression.

Hence when elections are held involving multi parties, the elections are said to be democratic.

It is constitutional since these rights are secured by the rule of law. When we combine the term constitutional democracy, we mean the process of getting a government that has at its goals the qualities normally associated with democracy- free elections, guarantee of inalienable rights, the primacy of the rule of law and so forth.

So, when we asked what is at stake here, the answer is: what is at stake in the destruction of (a) democracy (b) constitutional safeguards to that democracy.

I asked a lawyer friend- what does a stay of execution mean. He says it means the judgement is not operative yet. Who is the MB I asked. Zambry- came the answer.

I am puzzled here. A stay of execution means, the judgment given is not operative yet. It does not strike out the judgement granted. My initial understanding was- a stay of execution means just that- the judgment is stayed, not overturned. This means the finding of the high court judge were still intact. They have not been overturned by the Court of Appeal.

Now, if the findings of the court at first instance are still whole, what are they? Among others, I would think that Nizar is the rightful MB and Zambry, the illegitimate. Nizar is ruled to have never ceased to be the MB right from the beginning. If like now, the court of Appeal has agreed to a stay of execution, it does not confer a right to install Zambry as MB. That would make Zambry's assumption of the MB's post illegal and in contempt of a court judgement.

If Zambry is allowed to retake the MBship, we have a curious application of the law- which is accepting an unlawful person as MB. The decision of the high court wasn't overturned- it was stayed. The findings up to this point, unless the Federal Court now overturns it, are among others, that Nizar is the lawful MB,

Yesterday, I have offered an opinion as to the manner by which a head of government is deemed to have lost majority support. It must be resolved on the floor of a dewan sitting. 'In sitting' should take its ordinary meaning. There is no other political way in determining a loss of majority support, except by way of a resolution from the floor. It is not decided any other way.

It is not as simple as a case of BN has the support of the 3 deserters and therefore it has the majority. The sultan met them and confirmed it. We are offered a storied version of HRH Sultan of Perak asking each and everyone who attended, do you support BN and the answer was affirmative.

It then boils down to the issue of determining how one is deemed to have lost majority support. It is a question of politics. And the political solution is to have the matter debated in a dewan sitting.

When a head of government is deemed to have lost the majority support which is also the same as having received a no confidence motion, he has two options; one- to offer resignation and two, seek dissolution of the state assembly.

These two actions were played out by two different actors.

  1. Nizar sought dissolution of the state assembly which means, he accepted if votes were called in the dewan sitting, assuming the 3 deserters supported BN, he would be voted out.
  2. On the other hand, BN believing that it has the support from the 3 ex PR ADUNs, sought to have Nizar replaced as MB and in his place, offered Zambry Kadir.

What distinguishes the two approaches? To me the paramount principle that distinguishes the two approaches is:-

One party seeks a change in government by way of the ballot box; the other seeks a change in government by way of political roulette.

As a democratic country, we need to ask how do we bring a change of government? The only answer I think is, it can only be brought about by democratic means, which is through the ballot box. As Tengku Razaleigh observed, any other means of changing the government is unconstitutional and undemocratic, and subverts the basis upon which we are a civilised society.

What happens when the only democratic and legitimate way of changing a government is subverted? Among other things we lose the people's trust, we lose the people's confidence in the Constitution, in democracy and in our constitutional monarchy. In particular, powers reserved for the Legislative Assembly, which represents the sovereign will of the people, cannot be taken away under any circumstances by anyone.

It is not a question of who started it first. I have addressed this issue sufficiently in my earlier articles. I have also given reasons why I think the desertion of the 3 ADUNs was more damnable than the out-in leap of Nasarudin of Bota.

The Kalong Ningkan case as well as the African case cited therein, reaffirm the political principle, that what is essentially a political problem, need to be solved politically. The question of losing majority support must be resolved on the floor of a dewan sitting. And further, the political impasse such as this can only be resolved by allowing the rakyat to judge for themselves. That process of getting a government must never be made subordinate to political sleight of hand. That would not only subvert the will of the people, but one that reduces our own political future into a game of political roulette.

37 comments:

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 12:11  

Eureka! Datuk,

I have a solution. Since Perak has 13 districts, why not let BN administer 7 of them while the remaining 6 to the PR.

Habis cerita buat sementara waktu.

Kita buka buku baru after the next General Election.

Wise.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 13:05  

The bigger picture for Najib is to win the 13 GE. Letting Perak go could turn out to be his trump card in the longer run if he could at the sametime address the issues that majority of the people are pissed with.

The rampant corruptions (ineffective MACC), arrogant UMNO, tainted judiciary, AG Chanbers and PDRM are issues close to our hearts.

There are so many vested interests that it would be near impossible for Njib to reform all these institutions using conventional approaches. What perhaps could be done would be to delare some sort of amnesty (some thing along the line of the Truth Commission carried out by South Africa, after the collapse of the aparthied govt.)so that we can start afresh.

The UMNO warlords would be the least of Najib headaches, b'cos if he falls, they will follow suit. Hence Najib should start acting as if this is his last term. If some tangible reforms can be seen by the time 13GE is due, he would atleast have a fighting chance, which would be very much better than current scenario.

Malaysian are forgiving and will alway have a soft heart for those who are sincere.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 13:31  

Dato Sak,

There will be no ending cycle of arguments in this Perak fiasco !!
The courts would not administer laws according to laws.This have proven overtime !!!

PR wanted to give power back to the people of Perak to decide whom they want to be their government.

But on the other hand, UMNO wants to keep power for themselves,by any other means.

In this instance, we can see that which party are more people orientated and which one are power crazy.

UMNO is losing big....and Rakyat is already losing patient with UMNO.Trust me, come PRU13, UMNO/BN will be crush down to the ground by Rakyat !!

Hidup Rakyat !


Dakis.

Sam Yap,  14 May 2009 at 15:02  

AK47,

I note that after all the debates, arguments and analyses, you have finally arrived at a simple conclusion; similar to what I posted to your blog yesterday: that in a democratic country, no court should be allowed to decide who is to govern the state/country. The very essence of the democratic process is that the POWER to govern comes from the citizens/rakyat.

However, if the circumstances of the power change in Perak had adhered to the consitution, then we can only suppose that the BN has the right to rule. The problem is the non-adherence to the constitution.

We must take cognizance of the fact that the arguments put forward to the High Court and now to the Court of Appeal is about interpreting the constitution and not about who is the MB. Whoever ends up as the MB is merely as a consequence of the interpretation of the constitution.

The constitution is KING, even the monarchy exist by the grace of the constitution, " a constitutional monarchy".

Disrespect and non-adherence to the constitution can only result in a breakdown of law and order in our country.

I am not an attorney nor a solicitor, but it does not take to be one, to read and understand Article XVI (6) of the Perak constitution, which simply states that an MB can only be removed by a vote of no confidence in the dewan. No where else in the constitution does it state that the sultan or a court can remove a sitting MB.

Although many people maybe disappointed if Zambry gets to be MB, if the Nizar was properly removed by a vote of no confidence, the people would have no choice but to respect the fact that constitutionally, Zambry is the rightful MB. The due process has been followed.

IF Zambry and his exco do a good job and wins the hearts and minds of the Perakians, they may just win in the next GE.

But the current situation is quite the other way around. Zambry engineered the frogging and BEFORE a vote of no confidence can be taken in the dewan, Zambry tried short-circuiting the process by persuading HRH Sultan Azlan to appoint him as MB. Whether in his wisdom or otherwise, the Sultan acceded to the request and we end up with an unnecessary crisis.

To worsen matters, almost the entire government machinery was mobilised to throw out the sitting MB. Thats another wrong committed.

I can only suppose that your goodself have now realized that its all wrong. Whether its BN or Pakatan who rules is not important.

Whats important is not to follow the idiom "the ends justifies the means" when it comes to adherence to the constitution and obeying the law.

Again, thank you for the space to vent my frustration and share my thoughts.

Eyes Wide Open 14 May 2009 at 15:15  

Dato

What a different tone from the hawks.

Are you going for BUM2009? I would be honoured to shake your hand.

Pak Zawi 14 May 2009 at 15:16  

The State wide election had been due since February when signs of the jumping frogs first crop up. Wait no more, just get on with it. Whoever loses, pick up the pieces from there and redeem yourself so that you can be considered good enough to be elected again. Anymore delays will result in graver consequences.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 15:16  

Forget about the Perak State govt. Shut it down. Layoff all the civil servants. Maybe the people is better off without the gomen disturbing the peace.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 15:28  

Dato SPOT ON,AT LEAST YOU HAVE THE PULSE OF THE COMMON MAN.

Nik 14 May 2009 at 15:43  

Sak,

It is unlikely that UMNO will break its promise with the Three Rogues;
i.e;
1. They will never have to lose their Seats
2. They will be Duly Rewarded for their Efforts.
3. ..............Only Najib Knows

Think of the immense power these 3 have over UMNO. They are more valuable than all of UMNO members in Perak put together....

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 15:46  

That would be mean a bigger headache than before. The wise choice is to disolve DUN. BN says they are not afraid to face the people but their action says otherwise.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 15:47  

Datuk

Your article accurately highlights the issues involved. I salute you for your courage and principles. Although an UMNO member, you rise above partisanship to speak the truth.

Alice

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 15:52  

So you are saying with 2 MB in the state? lain kali kalau siapa kalau pun boleh jaga kawasanya...Think first before you say somethng man...Let the people decided who they want.

evobravo,  14 May 2009 at 16:03  

I agree, the solution is to go back to the people for decision. Thats the democratic way!

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 16:13  

Zambry's "illegal MB'ship and contempt of court" - it appears coincidental that your views are the same as those of DAP Ngeh's. You insist on those views despite your lawyer friend's opinion. It is, of course, your right to do so.

But democratic principles and practices are always subject to interpretations. There's no such thing as the prefect legal instrument, no parliamentary draftsmen can draw up a perfect constitution, no declaration of human rights is without any flaw or weakness. The British system of parliamentary democracy has gone through hundreds of years of changes and modifications to cover defects and deficiencies of the times. The American Constitution had benefitted from the British and the French models, yet it allows for detention without trial at Guantanamo Bay and the like. Similarly, the Malaysian Federal and State Constitutions are not clear on certain things. And the Sultan of Perak interpreted the Constitution as allowing him to determine Nizar's loss of confidence by calling all those concerned to state their stand in person, in front of him. Whether
determining the loss of support should be in the Assembly or not appears to me to be a matter of form and substance. The Speaker would not have allowed the motion to be tabled in any case. Those who disagreed could go to Court, like they did. That, too, is democracy.

That's why there is the profession called lawyers. They help the Courts decide. Including on appeals and counter appeals. In these circumstances, they are the ones who benefit a lot - they make money.

Money aside, on the subject of rule by the people, etc, let me state my opinion that the party in power isn't likely to agree to have elections unless they have good chances of winning. They insist that the principle of democracy, however basic it may be, has been practised; elections were held during PRU 12. The fracas occurred. But they agreed to abide by the Court ruling though it was not in their favour. They asked for a stay of execution. Appeals and counter appeals ensue. Why not leave the matter to the Courts?

We must remember that the most democratic of democracies is sometimes not so democratic. And democracy itself is subject to different interpretation. The socialists and the communists also say they are democratic. At one time the term "guided democracy" was current in certain places. But I think we are sufficiently democratic in Malaysia. Detention without trial is practised even in America.

ask melayuar,  14 May 2009 at 16:50  

AK47
"Let the people decide." That is precisely the strategy of Anwar & Gang. They lost the Olympic Frog jump and the only way is to create anarchy and confusion, legally and constitutionally, for people to get fed-up and in the end call for fresh election.

Don't you think that is good precedent?

A scenario taken from Thailand - the opposition created anarchy to destabilise the sitting government which was elected democratically, which then forced the army to take over.

Subsequently, like you said - "Let the people decide".

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 17:44  

Najib says BN is not afraid to face the people and the Sultan is the only one who can decide if there should be an election. But if BN agrees with PR, then both should inform the Sultan and let him decide. If BN does not ask for election, it is a moot to say only the Sultan can decide.

Nik 14 May 2009 at 18:28  

Datuk Sak,

I would have thought that the minds that rule this country should have the sense to know that by letting the Courts decide, they are in effect letting someone or someones whom they know little about (even if these people are under orders) decide their fates as well as the fate of the state of Perak!!

Your Picture of a Roulette for this subject is most appropriate!!

Unlike surgery, a lawsuit doesn't generally unfold in just a day or two; it can involve a lot of committment and one wonders if Zambry can do nothing else but spend his time over case after case (remember the 800+ penghulus taking him to court as well?). Although he seems to be enjoying it!...Ultimately, it might even require a longer rehabilitation process than major surgery..

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 18:28  

Should we also ask the rakyat to decide on the color of the MB's car?

Rakyat have made their choice in PRU12...electing their representative.The representative was PRIMARILY voted in as a PERSON and on a SECONDARY level cos of his association with the party.Having given the mandate to this person..let him be the one who uses his good grace,intelligence and humility to decide on whats best for the people.

You have made a choice of horses...and you can't change it midstream even if the horse is lame...cos the currents will just blow you away anyway.

The people will always get what they deserve.

Anonymous,  14 May 2009 at 18:52  

Lets imagine a hypothetical scenario...your ADUN is part of the ruling party (with a one seat majority) that decides to build a nuclear waste dump site in his constituency.He was adamant and fought with his party leaders to no avail.

Thus purely on that principle and to protect the interest of his constituents/voters he decides to swop seats..jump across and by doing that successfully reverse the dump site decision.

Is he a hero or a zero?

But,the basic principle is your ADUN is there to protect your interests and NOT his party's interest.So,lets not talk about elections but a properly conducted sitting in the DEWAN to decide who is the right MB.

Muhammad Firdaus Christopher,  14 May 2009 at 21:28  

Spot on Datuk !

Yup, I had some debates & exchanges with few lawyers as well and same responses.

Absolutely, return democracy to the RAKYAT & let them decide. The problem now with the RAKYAT is that they have forgotten (or rather intimidated) that we rightfully elected these YBs and we have the power to remove them as well. Whatever it is, they sembah us rather than the other way around.

Muhammad Firdaus Christopher

donplaypuks® 14 May 2009 at 22:11  

It's obvious that in this tussle for political supremacy, WE THE PEOPLE are of no concern to UMNO/BN or HRH, since technically they are safe till 2013.

They figure that once the Courts affirm their position, the Rakyat will forget by the time 2013 comes and that from then on it will be plain sailing.

Well, the PEOPLE woke up in 2008 and We will not forget come another millenneum.

http:donplaypuks.blogspot.com

Suci Dalam Debu 14 May 2009 at 22:33  

Datuk,

Looks like you are one of the very few that is telling UMNO that the light at the end of the tunnel is that of an on-coming train.

May you and your family be blessed always.

Tabahkan hati berkata benar. Syabas.

BrightEyes 15 May 2009 at 02:46  

Sak, what is your Boss Khairy's idea toward this whole Perak Circus? Snap elections?

Either way, your opinion (and Ku Li's too) is a minority in the party. Everyone else is too afraid to return power to the Perak citizens because they know they will get their asses kicked. Even The Det-Star admitted this today.

Expect to get more poop tossed your way from your fellow partymen. Expect to be again called 'senduk' by people who can't tell the damn difference between a ladle & spatula.

sakmongkol AK47 15 May 2009 at 07:52  

brighteyes, you said:-
Sak, what is your Boss Khairy's idea toward this whole Perak Circus? Snap elections?

very sorry to disappoint you BE- i answer to the beat of my own drums.
as to his idea- i am sure he has his own ideas.
indeed if you follow his writings recently on this thing in Perak, he thinks the opposite to what i am thinking.

UMNO people can defend what is defensible. since 1946, when UMNO was formed, i am aware of only one way UMNO takes power- through the ballot box and according to the rule of law. i am defending this way.

any other way- i will object in my own ways. when anwar wanted to the same method to seize federal govt- he was roundly condemned. karpal opposed as a metter of principle. Kit Siang banged the table to put a stop to the anwar nonsense. Anwar is negatively achiavellian.

Anonymous,  15 May 2009 at 07:56  

Kami, rakyat Negeri Perak, mahu BN kembali memerintah negeri. Sudah cukup dengan katun2 PKR, iaitu org2yg hanya memikir tembolok sendiri sahaja dan ala2 parti komunis Malaya dulu.

Kami mahu BN, kerana bila kami buat perbandingan (walaupun BN itu tidak maksum dari kelemahan sebagai manusia2 biasa), PKR adalah lebih gelojoh, kurang pengalaman, memikirkan kepentingan sendiri dan tidak berhemah tinggi dalam pentadbiran negara. Sanggup mengurangkan keperluan agama Islam (PAS) demi memberi muka kepada parti komponen, iaitu DAP.

Kami tak mahu islam kami dikucar-kacirkan. Kami lebih bahagia bersama BN.

Sila halang org2 luar dari memasuki Perak dan membuat huru-hara, konon2 kami adalah sedemikian rupa dan bersependapat dengan mereka.

Yang membuat demonstrasi di luar itu kalau ada perhatikan adalah dari ahli2 ekstrim PAS dan PKR.
Ada anda lihat DAP?

Sesungguhnya PAS dan PKR (mostly Melayu) telah dipermainkan.

Yang menangguk di air keruh adalah DAP.

Sila pastikan komunis tidak hidup kembali di PERAK!

linda 15 May 2009 at 08:36  

AK47

I think, I do not buy Anonymous' (14 May 6.13) argument of we have democracy in Malaysia.

By saying so, I mean total democracy as in the context of the word democracy. No doubt, there is no such thing a total democracy in its true meaning, it the the form and substance upon which democracy strives and practiced. I wish to stress here on the word "practiced".

The essence of democracy must be in the context of allowing it to be practiced.

His view that certain events in America is also not democratic is certainly a wronged and pale comparison. To sum it all, my son used to tell me that, "If one kills, it does not mean I should also kill". The gist here is what others do does not necessary impose upon me to do. I have my own choice and that is democracy in its own sense as well.

Anonymous,  15 May 2009 at 09:10  

Bila kita fikirkan secara mendalam, mereka yang mengatakan cara-cara kumulan PKR itu berupa komunis nampak nya betul. Terutama nya DAP.

Cara komunis di mana mana pun ada lah saperti berikut:

- jangan kisahkan apa orang cakap, asalkan orang bercakap fasal mereka. Itu ada nilai propaganda.
- porak peranda, kacau bilau, huru hara boleh menguntungkan. Eksploitasikan sa penuh nya untuk memburukkan musuh-mush mereka
- mereka akan permainkan perasaan tidak tenteram orang ramai dengan mengatakan itu semua kelemahan Kerajaan, pemerintah tidak adil dan sebagai nya, tidak pernah mengaku kesalahan mereka sendiri
- mereka gunakan apa sahaja alat yang ada, termasuk perasaan perkauman untuk mendapat sokongan kapada mereka dan kebencian kapada musuh.

Coba perhatikan sejauh mana cara-cara tersebut di atas telah di gunakan oleh mereka di masa masa yang telah lalu, termasuk bila memikat undi di PRU 12. Bila sudah dapat kuasa, kumpulan mereka gunakan cara katak lompat. Tak dapat di federal, dapat di Bota, Perak. Bila ada lain katak ikut melompat, sudah kucar kacir. Sekarang mereka tomahkan BN yang buat salah.

Saya harap banyak lagi dari mereka yang terpengaruh, meradang kapada BN dan memberi undi kapada mereka itu sedar. Ramai yang sudah sedar dan menyatakan kesilapan mereka di blog-blog, di perbualan-perbualan biasa. Saya sendiri mengaku kesilapan saya, walau pun tujuan saya tidak mengundi ha nya untuk mengurangkan majoriti BN supaya mereka tidak cuai memerintah. Saya sudah menyesal dan di pilihan raya akan datang tentu akan mengundi. Saya tetap percaya nasib Malaysia lebih terjaga di bawah BN walau pun saya tidak parti apa pun.

Toncet Biru 15 May 2009 at 11:07  

Datuk


Saya sukar untuk membayangkan kalau krisis ini berlanjutan sehingga beberapa bulan lagi. Ekonomi Perak akan musnah. Kerajaan Negeri Perak perlu membentangkan belanjawan 2010, saya rasa dalam bulan November. Tanpa kelulusan belanjawan oleh DUN, kerajaan Perak akan lumpuh. Saya rasa kes Speaker DUN Perak juga akan dibawa ke mahkamah. Pelabur-pelabur juga tidak akan melabur sekiranya mereka tidak tahu siapa kerajaan yang sah. Apa yang pasti kedua-dua pihak mesti meletakkan kepentingan rakyat melebihi kepentingan peribadi dan parti.

Navi 15 May 2009 at 14:33  

Dato',
The democratic process has to be reactivated and there is no two ways about it. You are 100% spot on for calling for elections. Let the people of Perak decide once and for all who should form the government.
The frogs have destroyed the fabric of decency. Give the rakyat a chance to form a government of the people for the people. Let not the decision of the 3 hoppers destroy the future of Perakians.

Anonymous,  15 May 2009 at 17:31  

syabas Datuk,

i never thought i'll have this much of respect to an umno man till i stumbled on your blog. but the fault was mine. i had prejudice.

malaysia needs politicians like yourself, both in BN and PR as well. only then we'll have enough balance and check in the government, whether its a BN or a PR government.

keep it up datuk.

peace

ngtiewley,  15 May 2009 at 18:53  

The 'Perak solution' is straight-forward and simple. It is the UMNO goons and its leaders that complicates matters. Please don't waste time and rakyats money in the on-going courts cases of which I lost count. GO BACK TO THE RAKYAT FOR A MANDATE !!! That is how simple it is!! Please feel the 'pulse' of the people of Perak and you will detect that they have a 'running high-fever' all because the UMNO goons like Zombie and gang are crazy clinging on to power with the hope to running the Govt. against the wishes of the rakyat. It is just not possible. A Govt is FOR THE PEOPLE BY THE PEOPLE. The PEOPLE decides not the POLICTICIANS, those whom they want to rule their state. Hope there will be a snap state election soon.

Suci Dalam Debu 15 May 2009 at 21:33  

Datuk,

I am at a loss and hope you can help me and other Malaysian see the light.

How come the courts are so quick to hear UMNO's cases/appeals and look like deliberately delaying PR's cases?

Are the courts neutral?

Do they follow" Not only must justice be done, they must be seen to be done"?

Our judiciary are the most efficient in the world, right? One man appeal court can decide so quickly. Where do they graduate from? I think we should nominate our judges to the International Court of Justice, The Hague.

Are they fed on magee mee?

Phew, wish I can be as efficient, smart and quick as our judges.

Anonymous,  16 May 2009 at 07:51  

gree wholeheartedly with Zawi's call for going back to the people for an election. "Wait no more, just get on with it. Whoever loses, pick up the pieces from there and redeem yourself so that you can be considered good enough to be elected again. Anymore delays will result in graver consequences." Sadly whn a problem arise we usually resort to the rule-book(constitution) last. We should have apply the law in the first place.

selling4u 16 May 2009 at 07:55  

Dato- from day One since I visited your blog( which was middle of last year), I thought" well well, this is a voice of reason in UMNO!" YOu have been consistently on the side e of truth and justice. Syabas!

Anonymous,  16 May 2009 at 10:40  

Remember what Dr M said - that BN will lose in the Perak elections and suggested a vote of no confidence against Nizar?

You think Najib will disobey this 'royal decree/opinion'?

Now read here what Najib said today, as featured in NST's online news.

"PAKATAN Rakyat can keep on dreaming of a dissolution of the Perak state assembly. Prime Minister and Barisan Nasional chairman Datuk Seri Najib Razak said a dissolution was not the only way to end the political dispute there. He reminded the opposition that the ruling coalition has the majority to rule the state".

And by co-incidence, Nizar's appeal will be heard now on 21 May, not 18 May.

Do you see a plot hatching?

The illegal MB can call for an emergency ADUN session before 21 May and pass a vote of no-confidence against Nizar.

On 21 May, the courts can say no need to hear the appeals by both Nizar and Zambry as it is a very academic situation by then as the legistlative had already voted out Nizar.

Do you see that happening?

Now, do you feel that this thing about BN likely to call for elections is actually an intentional distraction/red herring?

The very unfortunate lie that BN is spreading now is that Anwar was the one who started attempting party hopping culture, citing Sept 16, 2008.

How come BN is not admitting that its desperate state chief Khir Toyo was the first one who had the cheek to ask PAS ADUNs of Selangor to cross over with remunerations like the MB's post and introduction of the Syariah laws in the state? Khir Toyo admitted approaching PAS ADUNs for this purpose.

To set the record straight, BN should have the 'guts' (or 'balls') to say/admit that it started party hopping culture after 8 March 2008.

They were only sucessful in Perak, after getting two ADUNs who were nabbed by the MACC for corruption charges, where one of them even admitted having sex with a whore.

Chau Soi Lek resigned. But this Perak ADUN, admitted having sex with a whore and yet is remaining an ADUN.

See, even in the BN there is different types of treatment.

An MCA guy had to quit. But a Perak ADUN who supports UMNO is still holding on to his position and the fiercely independent MACC is still looking for evidence to tighten its case against this fellow.

This is BN for you all folks.

They forget what they started, and will blame Anwar.

They will get MCA guy to resign but will allow the whore-maniac fellow to remain ADUN even if he admitted openly about his sensual pursuits.

Malaysia Boleh or 1Malaysia?

Somebody is actually very happy as all this drama is taking away the attention from the foreign lady who disappeared in Malaysia, like the way her arrival records into this country vanished from computer records, despite the arrival premise being located in a Multi Media Super Corridor.

So, dear Malaysians, want some more distractions?
Wait for next week.
More exciting events will happen in Perak.

Nik 16 May 2009 at 11:58  

Dato'

Looks like Najib has to rethink the suitability of his choice of Zambry as BN's MB for Perak....especially with his latest "FOOT IN MOUTH" antics claiming similarity with Nelson Mandela Ghandhi and Martin Luther King!

He has yet to claim similarity with Obama.....

Unless Zambry's "FOOT IN MOUTH DISEASE" is cured, he may, through his own doing provide more material for the other side to use in their case against him....Claiming that he is the New New MB and going back to office on basis of temporary stay may only be one of those.....

All the other side has to do is let him continue damaging himself. After all "FOOT IN MOUTH DISEASE" is generally incurable.....

Shah,  18 May 2009 at 16:38  

Something rings a bell when Najib says something like "People in Perak should keep calm, the problem will be solved". Then I remember his sms to Razak Baginda. Very uncannily and eeriely similar.

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP