Sunday, February 22, 2009

Why blow hot and cold?

I read this today;

Nizar said PR expects to win such a vote as Perak Speaker V Sivakumar is likely to bar Zambry and his state executive councillors from attending proceedings after recently meting out suspensions against them.

This means PR will have the advantage with 28 assemblyman against BN’s 21 allowed to vote.

“We will table the motion and see who will get the majority,” Nizar told reporters today.

Sivakumar will seek consent from the Sultan of Perak to convene a sitting of the legislature, Nizar said. Read more Nizar clarifies Pakatan to seek vote of confidence in his government

Why not move for the dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly instead? Isn't that the raison d'etre of having current bangsawan in the first place?

I guess we won't be hearing the calls for dissolution of the DUN "in the interest of the people of Perak" anymore from today. From now onwards, for the sake of the people, the convening of the DUN sitting at earliest possible date should be top priority!

..pulak dah!

5 comments:

kluangman said...

Ini adalah percaturan biasa - selepas mempunyai majoriti di DUN - soal persidangan jadi keutamaan.

Pada peringkat awal dahulu - soal pembubaran DUN jadi keutamaan semasa mengadap Sultan kerana minoriti di DUN.

Ini adalah teknikal dan ketakutan.

Di pihak UMNO - kebuntuan terus menghantui - Paklah tak ada idea dan Najib membisu kerana calon MB bukan pilihan asalnya.

Baca blog Tun - betapa kelakarnya UMNO.

dinturtle said...

Salam Tuan Lawyer,

Sekiranya Pakatan teruskan dengan rancangan 28-21 itu, keadaan akan menjadi lebih parah buat mereka. PR mungkin berjaya mengambilalih semula kerajaan Perak tapi untuk berapa lama? Risiko buat Pr:

- Jelas tanpa kesangsian lagi Pr main kotor dan mereka akan hilang tag sebagai pihak yang 'teraniaya'. Orang akan mencemuh tindakan mereka yang tidak gentleman langsung. Mereka akan hilang sokongan atas pagar yang sebelum ini kesian pada pihak yang di'aniaya'
- kerajaan Negeri baru yang sentiasa takut pada bayang2. kerana mereka sedar majoriti mereka jelas boleh dipertikaikan. Tidak lagi boleh mengaku mewakili rakyat
- kerajaan Negeri baru yang jelas tidak lagi dapat bekerjasama dengan pihak Sultan.Kesannya akan dirasai secara menyeluruh diperingkat negara,bukan di Perak sahaja, seolah PR tidak menghormati institusi Raja2.

Kalau saya dipihak Umno, saya akan biarkan Pr terus dengan plan 28-21 mereka. Kemenangan mereka cuma sementara tapi kesan jangka panjangnya akan melumpuhkan terus kredibiliti Pr dikalangan rakyat.

Cadangan saya tetap sama, adakan undi majoriti dengan kehadiran semua wakil rakyat. Kalau Pr tewas pun, sekurang2nya mereka masih gentleman dan masih mengekalkan tag 'teraniaya' dek perbuatan Najib membawa masuk katak2. Yang penting, keadaan akan tenang semula.

Yoyo said...

Dari pandangan saya, PR akan membuburkan ADUN setelah dapat kembali pentakbiran Perak. Mereka tetap mengikuti penjanjian mereka iaitu, rakyat yang menentukan pihak mana yang mewakili Perak. Saya percaya atas kejujuran PR. Bangsatnya BN skr nak meruntuhkan image negara dgn cara dapat nasihat dari QC asing. Solusi ini apa? Bodoooh...sekali.

kluangman said...

Kita lihat kejujuran masing masing samada DUN dibubarkan jika Pakatan menawan kembali melalui persidangan atau melalui mahkamah.

Dan jika Pakatan tewas melalui persidangan atau mahkamah, wajar mereka hormati dan terima - jangan lagi ada tohmahan rampasan dan sebagainya.

Dalam masa yang sama tidak ada siapa pun yang 'bangsat' kerana masing masing menggunakan kelebihan dan kelemahan undang2 dan perlembagaan (kekaburan) untuk kepentingan masing2.

Anonymous said...

Betul kata lawyer kampung bahawa pendapat yang mengatakan Speaker DUN Perak mempunyai kuasa menggantungkan MB dan EXCOnya tidak semestinya betul.

Sila lihat/lawatilah juga
http://lenggongvalley.blogspot.com/
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Perak Pakatan snared in own trap over Sivakumar’s ‘brilliant’ move...

We are living in interesting times. Seems that Perak speaker Sivakumar may have just gone a wee bit too far to perform a coup de grace on PR's stubborn (albeit) foolish hold in the state.

Read the following excerpt:

Pakatan Rakyat members are shaking their heads in disbelief over the suspension of Menteri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six exco members by Speaker V. Sivakumar for 18 months and 12 months respectively.

Even DAP chairman Karpal Singh, a prominent lawyer, is stumped by Sivakumar's decision to order the suspension.

Karpal told a press conference at Parliament House in Kuala Lumpur Sivakumar must call for the assembly to meet to endorse his decision to suspend Zambry and six executive councilors.

He said Sivakumar's decision must be endorsed by the house.

He recalled his own experience in 2004, where he was referred to the privileges committee for saying that members of parliament were required to raise their hands before taking their oath of office.

The committee's report was tabled in Parliament and Karpal was suspended for six months without pay or privileges.

Several PR lawmakers here said the move was totally unexpected as they had painstakingly gone through the state constitution and the assembly's Standing Orders prior to Wednesday's hearing before the Rights and Privileges Committee.

"I was shocked upon hearing Sivakumar's decision. We had discussed about this (possibility of suspending Zambry and his exco members) and strongly advised against it.

"By doing so, we have fallen into our own trap, akin to stepping on a banana peel planted by ourselves.

"I honestly do not know whose advice he (Sivakumar) took before making up his mind," said a PR lawmaker.

Sivakumar might have just relied solely on Order 89 of the Standing Orders to justify the suspension of the recently sworn-in Barisan Nasional administration.

Order 89 states that the decision of the speaker upon any point of interpretation of any of these Standing Orders, or upon any matter of practice, shall be subject to a substantive motion moved for that purpose, be final, and the speaker may from time to time issue rulings thereon.

While this clearly means that the speaker's decision is final and cannot be challenged, Order 72 which governs the Committee of Privileges must also be taken into consideration.

Order 72(2) specifically states that when the assembly is not sitting, a member may bring an alleged breach of privilege to the notice of the speaker who may, if he is satisfied that a prima facie breach of privilege has been committed, refer such matter to the committee, which shall report thereon to the assembly.

The Perak state assembly is not sitting and is only scheduled to do so in April.

Sivakumar told reporters last Saturday that the findings of the committee would be submitted only at the next sitting of the state assembly.

Something must have happened after Saturday for him to suspend Zambry and his exco members in such a hasty manner.

Canning DAP state assemblyman Wong Kah Woh got the ball rolling by writing to Sivakumar asking to hold an inquiry against the seven BN leaders for allegedly violating the sanctity of the Perak constitution by getting themselves appointed as menteri besar and exco members.

-From NST-

Pendapt saya pula adalah;

Keputusan Sultan dibawah Fasal 16(6) Undang2 Tubuh Negeri Perak adalah keputusan yang dibuat dibawah Undang2 sepertimana hakim membuat keputusan.

Persoalan yang hendak saya ketengahkan ialah bolehkah Standing Order DUN yang bukannya Undang2 atau undang-undag subidiari (anak undang-undang)mengatasi Undang2 Tubuh (Bapak Undang-undang)? Bolehkan speaker DUN mengguna-pakai standing order yang bukan Undang2 mengatasi keputusan yang dibuat dibawah Undang2? Bukankah perbuatan Speaker menggantungkan MB dan exconya melanggar seksyen 121B (ingkar kuasa Sultan) dan 124 (menghalang mana-mana ahli parlimen dan DUN melakukan tugasnya) Kanun Keseksaan? Bukankah perbuatan Speaker DUN juga suatu perbuatan salah guna kuasa, atau bukan dibawah kuasanya?

Standing order yang bukannya undang2 atau jika pun undang2 subsidiari (macam anak syarikat)tidak sepatutnya mengatasi mana-mana undang2 apatah lagi undang2 tubuh negeri perak (macam syarikat holding).

Kini Speaker Dun mengatakan bahawa dibawah Perlembagaan pesekutuan, beliau tidak boleh didakwa atau di saman. Dalam perihal tafsiran Perlembaggan dan Undang2 Tubuh Negeri, suatu Fasal hendaklah dibaca secara seimbang dengan Fasal2 yang lain. Perlembaggan Persekutuan dan Undang2 Tubuh Negeri Perak memberikan banyak keitimewaan dan kelebihan kepada Sultan/ YDPA selari dengan ketuanan dan kedaulatan mereka.

Berbalik kepada keputusan Speaker DUN yang kononnya sah. Kini beliau hendak memanggil sidang DUN supaya dapat mengendoskan keputusannya menggantungkan MB Dato Zambry dan exconya. Apakah ini bermaksud keputusan penggantungannya belum sah? Jika belum sah, bolehkah MB Dato Zambry dan Exconya memasuki DUN jika sidang DUN diperkenankan Sultan?

Jika keputusan penggantungan Speaker DUN belum sah, apa pula kedudukannya sekarang? Masih MB atau tidak. Jika ia, apahal pula dengan permohonan Dato Nizar yang dia masih sah?

Inilah betapa kalutnya bila keputusan Sultan dipandang serong. Yang pelik lagi, keputusan Sultan boleh dicabar kata sesetengah pengamal Undang2 tapi keputusan Speaker tidak boleh pula.

Siapa yang Tuanku? Sultan Perak atau Speaker Dewan?

Prof Madya Dr Abdul Rani Kamarudin
Pensyarah Undang2 IIUM