They control the Police, they control the MACC, and they control the Judiciary.
So, would you believe in the Judicial Commisioner’s judgment?
(In the first place, the Assembly is the highest decision-making body of Perak, and is on top of the Executive Council, which in turn is on top of the Menteri Besar; hence, imagine the Judiciary, ie the courts coming in to interfere with the highest decision-making entity of the State?)
Well, Karpal is right; the Judicial Commissioner had erred. Ignore him.
Mr Speaker, as suggested, you should seek audience with the Sultan, inviting Nizar and Zambry along (please refer to proposition below).
But take it easy though; these ruthless guys will do just about anything to stay in power, so tread carefully, and do not give them any reason to jam or haul you up.
We believe that the dissolution will come, it is a matter of time.
916 Movement
916M: Perak: Solution for Constitutional Crisis
Great move Sivakumar, Nizar & Co!!!
Now that the Perak Assembly has reaffirmed its support for Nizar, and resolved to dissolve the Assembly, the next step now is to seek audience with DYMM Sultan Azlan to convince the Sultan to dissolve the Assembly.
However, it will not be just as easy as Nizar requesting for audience with the Sultan, and presto! audience will be granted.
In order that the desired solution can be achieved, we need to take a step back, and see it from the eyes of the Sultan.
Right now, the Sultan has 2 options, if presented with the request to decide on whether to dissolve the State Assembly or not; one is to say ‘yes’, the other is to say ‘no’.
Let us start with the Sultan being not supportive of dissolution, for whatever reasons he may hold. That being the case, the Pakatan Folks in the Perak Assembly will have to work harder, to steer the situation such that the Perak Pakatan Folks will be in full control of the State, until such time either the Sultan or Zambry & Co gives in. (As we see it, the only way out is via a snap election, and in the worst case scenario, if neither the Sultan nor Zambry & Co budges, then the Perak Assembly will have to assume control of the State until GE13 in circa 2013.)
However, as it stands now, with the constitutional crisis, it is highly likely that the Sultan will favour dissolution, given also the reaction from Perakians which hopefully the Sultan would have seen since his first decline to Nizar’s request for dissolution.
But if Nizar were to seek audience with the Sultan, it would be difficult for the Sultan to agree to the meeting, because in doing so, this will be tantamount to acknolwedging that he was wrong and/or that his appointment of Zambry was also wrong.
To overcome this impasse, our proposal is for Sivakumar, in his capacity as the Speaker of the Perak Assembly, to seek audience with the Sultan with the objective to persuade the Sultan to consider dissolution, on the basis that the Assembly had earlier today resolved to dissolve the Assembly.
Sivakumar also needs to invite Nizar and Zambry along, so that this will present the Sultan with an opportunity to mediate for a solution. With Zambry attending the said meeting, he will, in the eyes fo the Sultan, be attending in the capacity of the Menteri Besar whom the Sultan had appointed, and as such, the Sultan’s agreement to the said meeting can be made on the basis that the ‘duly’ appointed Menteri Besar is present.
We can then leave it to the Sultan, Sivakumar, Nizar and Zambry to decide on the outcome of the said meeting, and hopefully, the Sultan will subsequent to the said meeting give consent to dissolution.
One other difficult bit here is that Zambry may not play ball, or may not even attend the said meeting, in which case, it will then be left to the Sultan to decide on the basis of Sivakumar’s request for the meeting to convey the wishes of the Perak Assembly.
Of course, as noted earlier, if the Sultan does not agree to Sivakumar’s request for audence, then the Pakatan Folks will have to go back to the drawing board.
As it stands now, we firmly believe that the proposed solution above, ie Sivakumar seeks audience inviting Nizar and Zambry along, is the best solution which we can think of; certainly better than Nizar seeking audience with the Sultan, which in greater likelihood, the Sultan will not agree.
In any case, let us hope that the Perak Pakatan Folks will consider this or similar strategy, and let us take it a step at a time.
We now certainly have the upper hand, and let us take it easy.
We will get there.
916 Movement
Source: http://916movement.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/916m-perak-solution-for-constitutional-crisis/
The Malaysian Insider: Karpal: Perak State Assembly can ignore ‘null and void’ court order
| Posted by admin | |
| Wednesday, 04 March 2009 18:16 |
By Debra Chong, The Malaysian Insider
The Perak state legislative assembly can ignore the Ipoh High Court order declaring its sitting under a tree yesterday as “illegal”, said DAP chairman Karpal Singh.
Speaking to reporters at the Parliament lobby today, he said that Judicial Commissioner Ridwan Ibrahim had acted beyond his powers and in contempt of the state assembly in that decision.
He maintains the Perak assembly had met lawfully, if unconventionally, away from the gazetted venue of the State Secretariat complex.
Because of that, the High Court’s order is “null and void”, Karpal insisted.
He added there was no need for the Assembly Speaker, V. Sivakumar, or the Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen to challenge the order of the judge.
“His order has no significance. It is null and void. It is non-existent,” said Karpal, who is also the MP for Bukit Gelugor.
Instead, Speaker Sivakumar can order Ridwan to be brought before the assembly and cite him for contempt of the assembly.
Karpal also noted that the Judicial Commissioner had made an error in dismissing the five independent lawyers appointed by Sivakumar to represent him in the High Court and instead, compelled the latter to seek the services of the State Legal Advisor.
“It’s a conflict of interest,” he stressed, and pointed out the State Legal Advisor, Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, has persistently claimed to be representing Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir in a case related to the dispute over who is the lawful menteri besar at the KL High Court.
If the judge insists that Sivakumar be represented by Ahmad Kamal because the suit was taken against him in his official capacity, then Ahmad Kamal should immediately disqualify himself from representing Zambry.
Karpal noted in such a case where the state assemblymen are suing each other, they each have the right to get independent lawyers to represent them.
He added that deputy state legal advisor, Zulkarnain Hassan, should not have represented Sivakumar in closed chambers yesterday.
“Sivakumar is a trained lawyer. He could have represented himself,” he highlighted, and added, “We must let natural justice proceed.”
“By right, the judge should have adjourned the hearing,” Karpal opined.
Source: http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/18826/84/

