Sultan can appoint MB but can’t remove him

KUALA LUMPUR: The power of the Sultan to appoint or remove a mentri besar took centrestage at the High Court yesterday in the case between former Perak MB Datuk Seri Moham­mad Nizar Jamaluddin and his successor Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Nizar’s lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah, who noted that the Perak Constitution was the highest authority in the state, submitted that while the Sultan was conferred the power to appoint a mentri besar, he did not have the same power to remove a sitting mentri besar.

“It is well and good in appointing, that is entirely up to the Sultan but getting rid of the mentri besar is no longer the Ruler’s function – it is now up to the state council. That can only be done through a vote of no confidence in the House,” Sulaiman told High Court judge Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim when submitting on Nizar’s application to seek a declaration that he is the rightful mentri besar.

Nizar is also seeking an injunction to bar Zambry from discharging his duties as mentri besar.

This came after the Pakatan Rakyat government in Perak collapsed when three Pakatan assemblymen declared themselves independent, but friends of the Barisan Nasional coalition, in February. Zambry was subsequently appointed Mentri Besar.

Sulaiman said the appointment of a person to the office of the mentri besar was only valid if the office was vacant, as there could not be two persons holding the office.

“And the office will only be vacant if Nizar resigns or is dismissed. Nizar has not resigned,” he said, arguing that Zambry’s appointment was, therefore, unconstitutional.

Abdul Gani, who is an intervener in the case, however, said the Sultan had carried out his duty under the state constitution to ascertain that Barisan had the majority before appointing a new Mentri Besar.

There were only two provisions in the state’s constitution, he said, when a mentri besar could request for a dissolution of the state legislative assembly.

One was under Article 36(2) of the Perak Constitution when the five-year term of the assembly was drawing to an end and the other was under Article 16(6) when the mentri besar had lost the confidence of the majority of the House.

Nizar, he explained, had made the request under Article 16(6).

“When the Sultan refused the request, he and members of his exco are deemed to have resigned and their offices in the exco are vacated automatically. The mentri besar’s office therefore fell vacant and Zambry was lawfully appointed as the Mentri Besar,” he submitted.

Sulaiman counter-argued by stating that the mentri besar, similar to a prime minister, could request for a dissolution of the assembly prior to the five-year term.

The hearing continues today. (TheStar)

Click this link to read more!

Ngeh maintains Zambry and exco cannot attend May 7 assembly

KUALA LUMPUR,— A Pakatan Rakyat (PR) leader gave an indication today of how events on Thursday in the Perak state assembly will be played out, by maintaining Datuk Dr Zambry Abd Kadir and his six Barisan Nasional (BN) executive councillors did not have a right to attend the legislative sitting on that day.

State DAP chief Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham maintained today that the 18-month suspension meted out by the legislature’s rights and privileges committee still stood despite a recent federal court ruling overturning Speaker V Sivakumar’s suspension of the BN mentri besar and his six executive council members.

Ngeh argued in a statement issued today that the Federal Court’s declaration on April 16 that the speaker’s decision to suspend Zambry and six other BN lawmakers as null and void was a mistake as the speaker did not act alone in making the decision.

“The decision of the state rights and privileges committee was endorsed by the state assembly which was convened on March 3 2009,” said Ngeh, referring to the “under the tree assembly” called by Sivakumar where a motion in support of Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin as mentri besar was passed.

Ngeh’s remarks suggest Sivakumar could, as the speaker, order Zambry and the six BN lawmakers out of the assembly. It is unclear so far how Zambry and his BN colleagues hope to take his seat if such an order is made.

Apart from Zambry the powerful committee also suspended newly appointed exeuctive councillors Zainol Fadzi Paharuddin, Datuk Ramly Zahari, Hamidah Osman, Saarani Mohamad, Mohd Zahir Khalid and Dr Mah Hang Soon.

“Therefore the decision by the state rights and privileges committee is still valid and the assembly speaker as the chairman and member of the committee and the Perak state assembly is legally bound to the decision made by the two bodies,” Ngeh added.

Ngeh also said that the Federal Court has no right to force the state rights and privileges committee and the state assembly to abide by its ruling, citing Article 72 of the Federal Constitution which says the decision in any state assembly cannot be questioned in any court.

He claimed that the Federal Court had also rejected Zambry’s application to declare the emergency session of the assembly held on March 3, as illegal.

“The Federal Court’s decision as interpreted by Pakatan Rakyat lawyers does not allow Datuk Zambry Bin Abd. Kadir and six assemblymen from attending the state assembly and the decision by the assembly on March 3 2009 is valid,” said Ngeh

Zambry had claimed that the emergency session was illegal as it was convened without the consent of the state ruler, and the mentri besar is expected to use the new session of the assembly which begins this Thursday to legitimise his leadership. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Nizar wants Perak Assembly to be postponed

PUTRAJAYA, — Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin wants the May 7 Perak State Legislative Assembly to be postponed, pending the outcome of his lawsuit at the Kuala Lumpur High Court.

Nizar noted his political rival faction, the Barisan Nasional (BN), may feel pressured to hold an assembly before May 13 because they consider it the deadline to prevent the State legislature from being automatically dissolved.

“For Pakatan Rakyat, we have already had a legal assembly below the tree on March 3, so for us Pakatan Rakyat, we can have one before September.

“But Barisan Nasional is quite worried because they feel pressured to have one before May 13,” he told reporters at the Palace of Justice here after the Federal Court unanimously ruled today to reject his political rival Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir’s bid to fast-track the resolution of their dispute on who is the lawful mentri besar of Perak.

The five-man bench decided the High Court had to clear up the various disputed issues raised by Nizar first before it could make a decision on the case.

“Today’s decision showed the May 7 assembly should be delayed,” Nizar pointed out.

“When we talk about today’s decision by the Federal Court, it shines a light at the end... that the final remedy should be the dissolution of the assembly,” he added.

The 52-year-old newly-elected MP for Bukit Gantang looked very tense before the court hearing this morning, smiling tightly and speaking in curt tones to reporters who approached him.

But he was all smiles when the court ruled in his favour. Leaping from his seat in the public gallery, he rushed to hug Sulaiman Abdullah, a senior lawyer and one-time Bar Council president who had argued his case in court.

Nizar is suing Zambry for usurping the office of the mentri besar, which he claims is unlawful as he has not quit the post officially.

He has consistently resisted efforts to drag in the Perak Sultan into a legal battle, despite attempts by certain political quarters to do so.

Asked if he regretted having to file his affidavit revealing the details of his meeting with the Sultan of Perak in early February, Nizar said he had been reluctant originally but indicated he had been forced to “respond because those facts are what I’m going to say.”

He noted “the public will know what transpired between myself and Tuanku so they will make the judgment.

“At the end of the day, we don’t want the court to decide for the people. The government of the day must be decided by the rakyat. The court is just a way for us to seek a solution,” Nizar said.

His lawyer Sulaiman highlighted that they wanted to avoid “a hasty solution” which may lead to more complicated problems later on.

“Our view has always been go through the proper route: Go through the High Court, go through the Court of Appeal and finally come to the Federal Court with all the issues settled,” said Sulaiman, who welcomed the Federal Court’s stand that the High Court should settle all disputes before letting the apex court make the ultimate decision.

“It is not an immediate issue of who runs Perak that matters. These are fundamental issues that will arise for the country for many, many years to come and unless we get it right at the beginning, we are going to face a lot of problems in future,” he said. (TMI)

Click this link to read more!

Speaker claims defamation over notice of Perak Assembly sitting

IPOH : Perak State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar today claimed he was subjected to defamation over the instruction to issue a notice for the state assembly to sit on May 7

He said he was shocked over a report in The New Straits Times (NST) newspaper yesterday that he had been informed of the assembly sitting before the notice was issued. Sivakumar had said earlier that the notice was issued without his knowledge and approval.

"I will not allow this. It is another attempt to undermine my image and credibility.

"If the allegation is true, why are the people who issued the statement not bold enough to identify themselves in the daily? Why just say it (the source of the news) is someone associated with the office of the menteri besar?" he said in a statement here.

Sivakumar reiterated that he was not informed before the notice on the assembly sitting was issued by assembly secretary Abdullah Antong Sabri last Friday.

Abdullah Antong Sabri

He said his meeting with Abdullah, as reported in the newspaper, was held after the issuing of the notice by Abdullah without any consultation earlier with him (Sivakumar).

"I was told that a notice had been sent to my office at about 10am. A similar notice had been sent by the assembly secretary to all state assemblymen. I saw the notice at about 1pm.

"I only met Abdullah at about 3pm, after he had returned from Friday prayers," he said.

The NST reported yesterday that "Sivakumar had full knowledge of the issuance of the notice for the May 7 sitting of the assembly" before the notice was issued to all the 59 state assemblymen.

- BERNAMA
Click this link to read more!