QUOTE
Monday May 11 2009
Anwar: Pakatan open to talks about about Perak solution
BUTTERWORTH, May 10 - The opposition pact is prepared to hold
discussions with any party, including Umno and Barisan Nasional, to
find ways to resolve the Perak political crisis, Opposition Leader
Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim said.
The Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) advisor said there was no reason for
Pakatan to reject good intentions on the part of any party to resolve
the matter.
"There is no reason to refuse good intentions, including from Umno and
BN, provided that the discussion will be followed up by actions that
are in accordance with the law," he told reporters after meeting the
Permatang Pauh Village Security and Development Committee chairmen
here today.
He was asked to comment on a statement by Prime Minister Datuk Seri
Najib Tun Razak today that the BN was prepared to cooperate with the
opposition parties to resolve the Perak political crisis.
Najib had made it clear, however, that the BN would not agree to a
coalition government. - Bernama
UNQUOTE
COMMENTS: It may be too easy said than done.
But I would be expressing
my personal opinions about the "co-operation" between BN and Pakatan
that may resolve the impasse. As the root cause of Pakatan government
to fall short of the majority is because of the 3 unfaithful State
Assemblymen, it may unfair to other State Assembly men and Assembly
women and also costly to dissolve the State Assembly which the Sultan
of Perak may have that point in mind.
I think the best solution is to declare the 3 seats vacant for the
following reasons:-
1) Because the Perak people have been cheated by these 3 people who
used the recognized Party Manifesto and won the seat under the Party's
banner and not under personal manifesto.;
2) Whatever principle may apply to US or UK on legality to hop to another
party is inapplicable to the scenario in Perak State govt because one or two State Assembly men may hop to another party but not to cause the
change of State Government which is total a different story in the
interest of the Rakyat or People of Perak
3) The morality of these 3 Party hoppers or quitters are questionable
which warrants fresh by-elections of these 3 seats only and let the
People of Perak decides just on these 3 seats.
Both BN and Paakatan or independents can challenge these 3 seats and
make their manifesto clear esp. for the independents. In this way, the
anger of the People of Perak may dissipate because they felt cheated
by these 3 persons.
Perak State Assembly on May 7, 2009 is highly questionable on its
legality because the order of the House was not adhered to. Before the
Sultan had declared open the sitting, how could BN move a motion to
remove the Speaker?
How could the suspended Assemblymen could be
present in the House and showed contempt to the House when the Speaker
had ordered them to be expelled?
How could the sergeant-at-arms was
not doing the job to keep the House in order to escort the suspended
Assemblymen to get out of the House?
These Assemblymen can sue the
Speaker for the contempt of court but not take the Law in their own
hands to call for the Police to remove the Speaker by force! Majority shall rule but not ian nay uncivilised manner. How could the "MB" Zambry breaching the Special & Previleges Committee's rules and was suspended was still present in the sitting? How could the Court interfere with the Special and Previleges Committee's ruling?
Where is the Separate of Powers when the Police and State Assembly lawmakers
should be always independent?
Under what sections of the Police Act empower them to go inside the
Chamber to remove the Speaker? When Karpal Singh was "bullied" by
gangsters, what did the Police say to excuse themselves of
responsibility?
Now what is the reason given to empower them to
interfere with State Assembly Sitting???
Pakatan may be wrong to advocate party hopping to form the new govt on
Sept 16 but it was their wrong agenda. But BN should know better what
is right and wrong. By following the wrong concept of Pakatan does not
qualify you or legalize the wrong principle started by Pakatan.
Now who did the wrongful act is accountable to the People of Perak. The
battle between BN and Pakatan shall be long if BN hold to power
through illegitimate ways. By Monday, the official MB shall be known.
My simple understanding is that the MB could request the Sultan to
dissolve the State Assembly and shall resign as MB on the condition
that the State Assembly is dissolved. Of course the Sultan can decline
the request. Under such circumstances, then the MB shall retain his
post until a vote of no confidence is tabled against him. It is
technical but missing this technical aspect becomes illegal as the
rule of law is made to be obeyed. No one is above the man-made law.
One cannot change the law the way or reinterpret the law the way he likes in order to achieve one's selfish agenda.
If ex-MB Nizar lost the case against Zambry, it is TOTALLY
unacceptable because the dissolution of State Assembly is the
justification for MB to relinquish his post. If the dissolution does
not take place, then the MB shall retain his seat until a vote of no confidence
shall remove him. I do not think the BN legal counsel was right to say the seat of MB "is automatically vacant" when he requested the Sultan
to dissolve the Assembly. The dissolution must take place before the
Post of MB is vacant. This seat of MB falls vacant is conditional and
not automatic. The dissolution of assembly must take place otherwise
the lawmakers had made unfair law to the advantage of the powerful
few. If Sultan can appoint the MB, then it does not require a
democratic election process to elect the candidate to heading the
Party. So the principle of laws must be observed and the interest of
the People must be taken into consideration.
If Zambry won the case, it will create a precedent case for other State to fall into the same
state as in Perak by money politics and persuasion to hop to BN for
monetary gains. So the vicious cycle of selfish gains through party
quitting and hopping and unfair practices will continue if the Court
cannot decide fairly. The Court should help to put an end to all party
hopping and quitting by making a stand against them.
What do other people say? I would let you post the comments below. Thanks.
No comments:
Post a Comment