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, 27 August 2021

Vote Of Confidence. Part 2.

1. Obviously, she's a babe in the woods when it comes to politics. You can't see the issue of the confidence vote from a purely legal view. The specs may be blinkered.

2. Because her thinking on the issue can be changed with ease, it means the concept is open-ended. You can go either way.

3. But the majority of legal thinkers say, it ought to be done. That puts her thinking not only in the minority, but also unpersuasive.

4. As between the majority view and the minority, we opt for the former. Even in Islam, we have jumhur ulama view. A dissenting view, albeit from a professor, is insignificant.

5. The business of politics cannot be reduceable in terms of legal arguments.

6. If that is so, then might as well specify that all MPs be lawyers.

7. So despite her ultimate 'not necessary' a vote of confidence in parliament is necessary and ought to be done at the earliest.

8 It's to validate the PMs claim that he has a majority. Test it then.

9. Is it illegal to do it? If it is not, there shouldn't be any objection.

10. The good professor may think she is helping Ismail and if the PM chooses to hide behind the professor's new-found insight, then it suggests he has something to hide.

11. That's what you get when you evaluate the business of politics from purely legal perspectives.

12. In a sense, that is hubris thinking. You think that everything is solvable by law.

13. If as the professor admitted it's a decree from the King, to openly contradict it means what?

14. That's highly disrespectful and even borders on treason.

15. My other objection is reading the constitution in a technical and mechanical way.

16. Whereas in my opinion, the constitution is a living organism. It's just a skeleton without muscles, flesh and sinew. It must be tempered and edified with lots of common sense logic.

17. When Hussein Onn and Abdullah Badawi were appointed PMs, they went before parliament to test their majority. They were confident because they had 2/3rds majority.

18. Now, as the present PM claims he has a majority, he ought to do the same. If the majority is contentious, there is the more reason to test it to allay fears of suspiciousness.

19. In the end, getting a verification in parliament is necessary because the King wants it, as do the people.

20. Of course, the penultimate test is a GE. That's not permissible at the moment because of the f****d up COVID management.


  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP