Court of Appeal rules Zambry is Perak MB

The rightful MB of Perak Datuk Dr. Zambry (courtesy of NST @ 22 Mei 2009)

As I have opined in my last post on the Perak crisis, the Court of Appeal today unanimously rules that HRH the Sultan of Perak had legally and rightfully done what he did in appointing Datuk Dr. Zambry as the MB of Perak and by refusing to dissolve the Perak State Legislative Assembly when sought by Ex MB Datuk Mohd Nizar to do so as he believed then that the latter had ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the Assembly.

Below is the report published By LISA GOH and YENG AI CHUN courtesy of the STAR ONLINE late this evening:-

PUTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal has unanimously ruled that Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir is the valid mentri besar of Perak.

The three-man bench, in setting aside the High Court’s decision earlier which ruled that Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin was the rightful mentri besar “at all material times,” held that Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the Perak State Legislative Assembly.

“The learned High Court judge erred in his interpretation of the relevant provisions in the Perak Constitution.

“Accordingly, the appeal is allowed,” said Justice Md Raus Shariff, who chaired the bench, which also comprised Justices Zainun Ali and Ahmad Maarop.

The court held that based on the facts of the case, Sultan of Perak Sultan Azlan Shah was right in making enquiries to satisfy himself on who held majority in the state assembly, and was right in his appointment of Zambry.

It further ruled that there was no express requirement in the Perak Constitution that there had to be a motion of no-confidence passed before it was determined that Nizar had ceased to command the confidence of the assemblymen.

“The fact that the respondent (Nizar) had ceased to command the confidence can be obtained through other means,” he said.

Justice Md Raus delivered the judgement in less than 10 minutes, and said that the written judgement would be prepared in about a week.

Based on the facts of the case, the court found that Nizar’s request for dissolution was made under Article 16(6), and not Article 36(2) of the Perak Constitution.

Article 36(2) is a general provision for which a request for dissolution can be made when the five-year term of the assembly is drawing to an end.

Article 16(6), on the other hand, states that if the mentri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the legislative assembly members then, unless at his request the Ruler dissolves the legislative assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the executive council.

The bench also affirmed the court’s decision in the case of former Sabah cabinet minister Datuk Amir Kahar Mustapha who refused to resign in 1995 after the then Sabah chief minister Datuk Seri Joseph Pairin Kitingan had quit.

Cheers!

Just in .. A stay of execution granted to Dr. Zambry

Datuk Dr. Zambry receiving a Datukship from HRH, the Sultan of Perak

Folks, in case you all missed the news just now, here it is, the Court of Appeal, at 1.15pm. today granted Datuk Dr. Zambry’s application for a stay of execution of the High Court ruling yesterday which declared Datuk Seri Nizar as the rightful Menteri Besar of Perak pending the former’s appeal at the Court of Appeal.

In his ruling, Court of Appeal Judge Datuk Ramly Ali said he was satisfied that there were special circumstances to grant the stay as Datuk Dr. Zambry’s appeal would be rendered nugatory if the stay was not granted.

With this decision, Datuk Dr. Zambry returns as the Menteri Besar after being in a political limbo for about 21 hours. In an immediate response, He overturned all key BN policy reversions declared by Datuk Nizar Jamaluddin earlier this morning including lifting the suspension of the State Secretary and State Legal Adviser.

Cheers!

No end in sight of the Perak crisis ….

Datuk Seri Mohd. Nizar soon after being declared by the KL High Court as the legitimate MB of Perak (Picture posted by courtesy of the STAR online)

As a very concerned Malaysian, I can’t help but ponder on the latest twist of political fortunes befalling on the lap of Pakatan’s Datuk Seri Mohd. Nizar Jamaluddin, the “ex-MB” whose application for a declatory relief was granted by High Court (Appellate and Special Powers) judge Justice Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim who declared that he is still and was at all material times, the legitimate Menteri Besar (Chief Minister) of Perak on the ground of him having been unconstitutionally replaced by the HRH Sultan of Perak although he had at all material times, not vacated his post as Menteri Besar as he had not lost the majority confidence of the State Legislative Assembly whatsoever vide a vote of no confidence pursuant to section 16(6) of the Perak constitution.

In other words, Justice Abdul Aziz said that Nizar, once appointed Mentri Besar, was only answerable to the State Legislative Assembly and that based on democratic practice, the vote of no-confidence should be taken on the floor of the assembly and only that way, Nizar could be forced to resign.

On the other hand, since his oral application for a stay of execution was rejected by the said Court yesterday, I was made to understand that Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir had already filed his appeal against the said ruling yesterday at about 9.20am this morning at the KL High Court Registry together with his formal application for stay of execution at the Court of Appeal to avert a potentially explosive political and administrative upheavel in Perak as proven by the swift action taken by Datuk Seri Nizar to suspend with immediate effect two very senior officers of the state administration namely, State Legal Adviser Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid and State Secretary Datuk Dr Abdul Rahman Hashim for a very obvious reason indeed. I reckon, although, Mohd Nizar justified it as being “not done out of revenge but was initiated in the interest of the people” . I am more than convinced that it was done out of spite and revenge for the way these two officers had acted previously.

The question is, would HRH the Sultan of Perak consent to Mohd. Nizar’s request to dissolve the Perak State Legislative Assembly now that the Court had reinstated the latter? In fact, with the said declatory relief granted to the latter, one cannot miss the point that by and large, the Court had expressly implied that there was something not right in so far as the Perak constitution is concerned in the way Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir was appointed as the new Perak MB to replace Datuk Seri Nizar on the 6th of February 2009.

Would HRH the Sultan of Perak dissolve the State Legislative Assembly to pave the way for a snap state election? or would he wait for the result of the two Appeals made by Datuk Dr. Zambry? It is afterall the Sultan’s sole prerogative as despite yesterday High Court’s decision, question still lingers on whether he had acted legally pursuant to the Perak constitution by way of a precedent case in Sabah which had ruled differently when the High Court then had adopted a decision handed down by the Privy Council in Africa which suggested that whether there was a lack of confidence against a Mentri Besar (or Chief Minister) need not have to be found on the floor of the Assembly.

In other words, the Ruler or for that matter, the TYT, could appoint a new MB or Chief Minister by virtue of the fact that upon thorough examination of the facts and evidences presented to him outside the Assembly, he is convinced that the former does no longer command the majority of the Assembly, could appoint a new MB or Chief Minister, whom he believes at that material times, commands the majority of the Assembly.

Hence, Folks, based on this alone, I tend to bet my money on this one and therefore, I honestly believe that HRH the Sultan of Perak had acted legally and had acted so within the ambit of the Perak Constitution. Therefore, I figure, he would not dissolve the Perak State Legislative Assembly as yet.

Cheers!

When sense and sensibility no longer apply

It is rather unfortunate to witness the political impasse in Perak not showing any sign of concession from either party of the political divide. To some, the open-air so-called emergency assembly sitting under the raintree in Perak was so surreal that one couldn’t believe that it would ever happen in their lifetime. But that was what actually happened yesterday when the Perak Assembly Speaker, V Sivakumar called it to be held just about 100 meters from the locked Perak Darul Ridzuan building.

The Pakatan Rakyat “MB”, Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin referred to it as under the “doctrine of necessity” that the Perak state assembly should hold an “emergency session” under such circumstances and therefore, believed it to be valid.

On the other hand, while they were at it, the High Court in Perak was inundated by legal arguments from the counsels of Perak MB, Datuk Dr. Zambry Kadir for the Court to agree to issue out a restraining order against the Speaker from convening any legislative assembly meeting inclusive of the one held yesterday without the DYMM Sultan of Perak’s consent. Well, they got it indefinitely to the effect of deeming illegal the said meeting and any other future meetings called by the Speaker without the Sultan’s consent prompting BN lead counsel, Datuk Hafarizam Harun to suggest that ” a meeting under the tree will remain under the tree “.

Folks, whatever it is, to me, it is quite natural for any supporters of the parties involved to suggest that whatever measures taken by their leaders to resolve the constitutional crisis are valid and within the law and that the other parties’ action are seemingly not valid and unconstitutional. They seem to suggest that the law is on their side. Well folks, just hang in there for a moment. Since both parties have resorted to the Courts for a decision and further relief, it is apt that all parties especially the Opposition to restrain themselves from doing anything illegal which would contribute to further political instability and chaos in the country.

Then again, it just occured to me that had Anwar Ibrahim’s attempt to lure the 30 odd BN Members of Parliament to jump ship to the opposition last year been successful, would the opposition be so kind and generous now to say that what they did then was constitutionally and morally valid. I don’t think I can reconcile with their attitudes today. Surprise! surprise! surprise!

So, the question is why is it considered by the PR and their sympathisers as immoral and unconstitutional when the BN was able to get the 3 Perak PR assemblymen to cross over to them? Double standard on the part of PR? I would like to think so.

If the argument is that it becomes immoral and unconstitutional when either money or position is involved. Let me just say this, Please show hard evidence and hard evidence only to MACC. Merely a bare allegation is as good as no evidence at all. Hence, pending the High Court’s decision, sense and sensibility must prevail.

Cheers!