Article 16 of the Perak Constitution says that the Sultan shall appoint the Executive Council ("EC"). He must first appoint as Menteri Besar from the members of the Legislative Assembly who "in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly." Then on the advice of the MB, the Sultan shall appoint other members of the EC.credits to blogArticle 16 (6) is very important. It says:
"If the MB ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council."
Article 16 (6) is very important. It says:
"If the MB ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then, unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council."
If we could now look at this provision closely. There is no subjectivity here. It does not say, for example, "if the Sultan is of the opinion that the MB ceases to command the confidence of the Assembly", or "if it is likely that the MB has ceased to command the confidence of the Assembly". It says clearly that "if the MB ceases to command". That means this provision kicks in only and only if, it could be factually proven that the MB has ceased to command the confidence of the Legislative Assembly. In other word, the Sultan is not imbued with the power to make his own subjective judgment over this fact and matter . For this provision to operate, it must be established as a fact that the MB has ceased to command the confidence of the Assembly.
How is that fact established then? In countries practising the Westminster typed democracy, this fact is established with a vote of no confidence on the floor of the Assembly.
Next to be examined is Article 16 (7). It says:
"Subject to Clause (6) a member of the Executive Council other than the MB shall hold office at His Royal Highness' pleasure, but any member of the Council may at any time resign his office."
It is of paramount importance to note that only the MB does not hold office at the pleasure of the Sultan. From a literal reading of this article, it is clear that the Sultan may therefore sack any member of the Executive Council but not the MB.
Can the Sultan Ask the MB to Resign?
With all due respect to HRH the Sultan of Perak, I don't think the Sultan has the power to ask for the resignation of the MB. It has been argued elsewhere that the provision of the Interpretation Act 1948 would give the power to the Sultan to dismiss the MB. While I concede that section 94 of that Act gives the power to dismiss in every instant where a power to appoint exists, it must be remembered that the Interpretation Act does not apply "where there is something in the subject or context inconsistent with or repugnant to the application" of the Interpretation Act.
Where is the context inconsistent with the application of the Interpretation Act here? The answer lies with Article 16 (7) above. It is clear that the MB does not hold office at the pleasure of the Sultan as opposed to the other members of the Assembly. Had it been intended that the Sultan should have the power to dismiss the MB as well as the other members of the Executive Council, Article 16 (7) would not have made such a glaring and clear exception so as to expressly preclude the MB from the operation of that Article.
What are my thoughts?
I think that HRH the Sultan of Perak has been impartial in his decision. He did not take sides when deciding on his 2 choices.
His Majesty himself had summoned the presence of all the elected representatives to declare their support for the Barisan Nasional government to be formed. After much considerations, his majesty decided on the issue. Although it seems unfair, I really think that His Majesty did what he thought was right and was fair to Barisan Nasional.
The issue on party hopping.
I think it is unethical to party hop. I dare say this because Malaysia, or more accurately, the people of Malaysia is NOT ready to accept value-based politics, but has constantly and will continue to vote based on racial-politics and party-based politics.
It is clearly unethical because that it was the people that chosed in the March 8, 08 election that the opposition should form the new Perak government. For the 3 candidates from Pakatan Rakyat to hop over to Barisan Nasional clearly shows how unfit, idiotic and corrupt our Malaysian politicians are.
There are some news spreading around talking about why 2 candidates from Pakatan Rakyat crossed over, that is to get rid their corruption charges, while the DAP woman crossed over due to her greed in not getting benefits from the former Perak opposition led government.
Yes, I agree with Datuk Mukhriz's speech earlier today on party hopping.
The opposition government cannot and should not put blames on BN that it is unethical for party hopping. This is because, Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim himself wanted to use the same tactic to take over the Federal Government shortly after the March 8,08 general election. Then he moved on to make more promises, like our present Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, the Prime Minister of broken promises.
In fact, one of the deflectors from PR, was initially from UMNO(BN), who previously deflected from UMNO to PKR barely 2 weeks ago. Now, he has returned to BN.
How low can this politician be?? He should just resign.
May God pass judgment upon him giving him eternal damnation for standing too low.
This is the very reason I HATE politicians.
And from watching the evening news, I heard Datuk Azalina Othman saying that it is the people's voice that BN should form the Perak government.
CORRECTION MISSY!!!! IT AIN'T TRUE. YOUR STATEMENT IS TOTALLY WRONG!!!
The people voted for the Opposition.... NOT BN.
Also, before I end, I would like to include views from another blog on this particular issue :)
My friends blog... Kern Yan
0 comments:
Post a Comment