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

Friday 23 July 2021

The phantoms of the Malaysian parliament. Serie 1. Legitimacy and parliamentary fraud.


1. One of the articles of the umno constitution is to defend constitutional democracy. The definitive place to defend it is parliament. Unfortunately, many of the umno MPs have no inkling that the sacred constitutional democracy is raped by non-other than Wak Mahiadin.

2. For example, I hear 'amirulmukminin' Najib Razak the convicted felon, talking about constitutional democracy. Which for him means absolute rule. Thus, any violation on the constitution, for as long as it doesn't rock absolute rule, is not spoken against by Najib.

3. Indeed, it's in his interest to remain indifferent whenever democracy or the constitution is violated. As long as it promotes absolute rule, he will shut up. Because he and his cabal hope to enjoy the benefits of absolute rule.

4. Not so to the true democrat. He will always be vigilant and sensitive to any violations on the constitution. Ready to do battle. He and other right-thinking MPs will speak against any violations. Especially when the violator in chief is the backdoor PM.

5. I suspect a true long serving democrat like Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah would be extremely horrified at the unchecked abuse of the constitution, nay democracy itself.

6. A clear and present assault on parliament and the constitution is the abuse of article 55(1) where the PM cavalierly dismissed the rule that 6 months must not lapse between the present sitting of parliament and the last sitting.

7. Needless to say that this is a clear violation of article 55(1). I wished there are many more right-thinking MPs who would challenge this violation.

8. Under that article, it behoves the PM to advise the King of a date of summoning parliament sitting, but not do the opposite.

9. That is, the PM cannot act, omit or advised the King NOT to summon parliament. Nor can he prevent the sitting of parliament on the pretext of an emergency or because of the covid pandemic.

10. Those arguments, to me, are spurious. The PM can avail himself to an eid prayer congregation of 300 people, but cannot call for parliament to sit? Good grief!

11. The PM has not advised the King nor the speaker to reconvene parliament, on purpose, I may add.

12. Because he has not done so, it is my contention that such a contemptible act, disqualifies the PM from interfering in any form, in the due process of parliament.

13. That power now, I submit, rests with the king. He may command the speaker by way of giving notice of 28 days or shorter to reconvene parliament.

14. This needed to be done in compliance to Article 55(1). It is mandatory.

15. Therefore, I hail brave souls like Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah for wanting to write to the speaker alerting him of the 6 months timeline, otherwise parliament is in default.

16. The actions of the PM is a severe violation of the constitution. By withholding the right advice is tantamount to blackmailing parliament and is therefore a form of coercion.

17. Parliament is the most supreme of our institutions. It is the custodian of our constitution. It makes the laws of the land. It represents democracy and freedom.

18. Hence, violation of the constitution by the swollen faced man from Pagoh, is the dagger pointing at the heart of our democracy and freedom.

19. And freedom, says F. Hayek, is to be free from coercion, explicit and implicit. Violation by the Pagoh Neanderthal is coercion.

20. Silence, to these violations, is not an option. Silence means you are agreeable to these indiscretions and that you are really absolutely despotic in thinking.

21. You can't have the sanctity of parliament defended by the convicted felon, the Java man from Bagan Datoh, the catfish mouthed man from Peringat, the guard dog from Pasir Salak, the half past six lawyers from Rengas, or the uncivilised 'FU' buffoon from kinabitangan et al.

22. They are more interested to preserve the indiscretions, for they hoped to continue with the same despotic rule. The solution is never to admit these mothersffers to parliament again!

23. Its no coincidence that the treatment to parliament coincided with the presence of a no confidence vote against the Pagoh Neanderthal. Therefore, there is a strong suspicion that parliament is emasculated to avoid that motion!

24. That particular motion calls into question the legitimacy of the Mahiaddin government.

25. The inevitable conclusion will come. When it does, lets charged Mahiaddin for the following :-


  • A. For violating article 55(1). 
  • B. Failure to advise the King and Speaker to reconvene parliament. 
  • C. For declaring a false emergency. 
  • D. For fraud ing parliament. 
  •  E. Other charges which can be cooked up by the shyster lawyers. 


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP