Tuesday, March 31, 2009

Bukit Gantang: 马华技穷炒冷饭维生

民主行动党霹雳州宣传秘书兼桂和区州议员黄家和律师于2009年4月1日(星期三)在武吉干当所发表的声明:

(武吉干当1日讯)民主行动党霹雳州宣传秘书黄家和律师表示,国阵马华在华人选区中炒作回教国课题,显示出国阵在华人选区内已经技穷,没有其他课题可以向人民交代与宣扬。

也是桂和区州议员的黄家和今天发表文告表示,国阵马华在每次大选都使用同样的恐吓手段,提出回教法、断肢法之类的言论,企图恐吓非回教徒选民捞取选票。

“但是,308大选的成绩已经证明人民已经不再受国阵这一套所蒙骗,而民联在拿督斯里尼查作为州务大臣期间所带来的改变、所落实的许多政策,包括新村永久地契、独中以地养校、施增贫苦的政策上都以全霹雳州人民利益作为出发点,没有任何的宗族、宗教背景色彩。巫统主导下的国阵在过去的51年来都以种族性政策为施政方针,玩弄宗族情绪,相比其民联短短10个月的政绩简直是相形见绌。”

黄氏表示,民联的执政成绩使到国阵马华在华裔选区技穷,必须以炒作回教国课题冷饭维生,实在是可悲。

黄氏表示,马华在为巫统全力助选的时候,必须向霹雳州人民明确交待立场,是否能够保证延续民联利惠全民的政策,尤其是在变天事件后已经被完全搁置申请的新村永久地契事项,而不是在这些课题上继续保持沉默。

Bukit Gantang: It is not an easy battle...

I was at Simpang PR-DAP ceramah yesterday with 300 people attending. The atmosphere is worrying in the sense that the Public are too confident of a Nizar’s victory while in fact that is not the case. Not to forget, Barisan is also having free dinners here and there to buy votes, more particularly there were 2 free dinners of 180 tables each just nearby our Ceramah yesterday.

The crowd attended our Ceramahs play a very important role. It is not only that they have to be convinced to vote for Pakatan-Nizar. They all must also help to convey message to the rest, to the fence sitters on how to ensure a Pakatan-Nizar’s victory.

Let’s start the war of phone calls and sms-es at Bukit Gantang. Call and text everyone you know in Bukit Gantang. Get all of them involve in this run for justice for the Perak People, come back, turn up and vote Pakatan-Nizar.

I will be there tonight, for Ceramahs in Simpang and Sepatang.
---
Apology to my constituents in Canning, i may be spending less time with all you you until after the by-election.

Monday, March 30, 2009

Bukit Gantang...

I am going to Bukit Gantang tonight for a Ceramah in Simpang. BN, especially UMNO as usual, is playing the racial cards again.

In chinese area, BN components are lacked of new ideas. They can only use the same old tactic which had proven to be a failure on 308. DAP is being bad mouthed of supporting a “fanatic-religous-Islamic State”. In Malay areas, BN is accusing Nizar of being a “boneka” to Chinese and DAP.

Although a lot of People hold the view that Nizar can win, even winning bigger, but i will not be that confident. It is a 50-50 battle. Due the attack on Nizar by UMNO, it is even more pertinent for us to help Nizar, especially in Malay areas.

Let’s work on. Let’s ensure a victory for Pakatan, Nizar, a victory for the People.

Stop! Don't even take your child's cutest moment and burn into CDs!

A strict interpretation of the 2002 Act will mean that, even if you took your child’s cutest momentand put it into CD and distribute it to your relatives, it is an offence. How ridiculous, draconian and unreasonable is this law being used against Sdr. Ong Boon Piow.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Film Censorship Act 2002

The authority nowadays seems very instersting in enforcing laws. It seems that, all the Malaysians, have to read up some laws eventhough you are not a lawyer, and even if you are a lawyer please read up the laws which you are not even aware of. How many will expect the Police will act on this Act and use it as a reason to arrest YB Ong? Ridiculous!!!
---
3. Interpretation.
In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires- "film-publicity material" includes the original or duplicate of the whole or any part of a picture, photograph, poster, figure, handbill, slide, newspaper advertisement and any other form of advertisement printed or recorded on any material and intended to publicise a film;
… "film" includes the original or duplicate of the whole or any part of-
(a) a cinematograph film; and
(b) a videotape, diskette, laser disc, compact disc, hard disc and other record,
of a sequence of visual images, being a record capable of being used as a means of showing that sequence as a moving picture, whether or not accompanied by sound; …

9. Submission of film for censorship.
(1) The owner of a film shall submit the film in the prescribed manner for censorship to the Board without any alteration or excision and at his own risk and expense-
(a) in the case of an imported film not exempted under subsection 8(3) which is released under section 7, within the time and at the place specified in the permit issued in respect of the film under subsection 8(1); or
(b) in the case of a film made or produced in Malaysia and intended to be exhibited in Malaysia, within fourteen days of the completion of such making or production.
(2) The owner of a film who contravenes subsection (1) commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than five thousand ringgit and not more than thirty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both.

10. Decision of the Board.
(1) Having viewed a film submitted to it for censorship, the Board may-
(a) approve the film for exhibition without any alteration;
(b) approve the film for exhibition with such alteration as it may require; or
(c) refuse to approve the film for exhibition.
(2) The Secretary shall notify the owner of the film in writing of the decision of the Board made under subsection (1).
(3) In a case to which paragraph (1)(b) or (l)(c) applies, the Board shall furnish to the owner of the film in writing its reasons for requiring the alteration or for the refusal.

14. Certificate "A".
The Board shall certify that a film-
(a) has been approved under paragraph l0(l)(a); or
(b) has been altered as required by the Board,
by issuing a certificate which shall be known as 'Certificate

16. Duplication of film.
(1) Where a person intends to duplicate the whole or any part of a film which has been certified under section 14, he shall submit a statutory declaration to the Board stating-
(a) his intention to make duplicate copies;
(b) the precise number of duplicate copies he intends to make; and
(c) that the duplicate copies are made from the original film approved and certified by the Board under sections 10 and 14 respectively.
(2) No person shall make a duplicate copy of the whole or any part of a film that has not been approved and certified by the Board under sections 10 and 14 respectively.
(3) Any person who contravenes subsection (2) commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine of not less than five thousand ringgit and not more than thirty thousand ringgit or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both.

17. Certificate "B".
The Board shall issue a certificate which shall be known as 'Certificate "B" ' for every duplicate copy made in accordance with section 16.

Update: YB Ong Boon Piow's arrest

YB Ong Boon Piow was arrested by the police and was brought to Pekan Baru Police Station yesterday shortly after the launching of DVD on Perak Democracy at Chin Woo Hall, Ipoh. He was subsequently released on police bail around 1 plus in the morning and was requested to report himself at Sg Senam Police Station on 13.04.2009.

The offence alleged was that of producing DVD without Sijil B under Film Censorship Act.

There were only less than 200 attendees yesterday as there was heavy rain in town. Yet, the Police had again, chose to interfere, this time not on illegal assembly but on the Film Censorship Act.

It is not a movie production. Everything contained therein are recorded from the actual scene. Is it an offence by putting the truth to the People?

YB Ong Boon Piow arrested!

I just received an sms from Sdr. Ngeh Koo Ham that YB Ong Boon Piow was arrested at Chin Woo Hall, Ipoh just now for the production of the DVD on Perak Democracy. The DVD was the edited clips on the Democracy under the tree. The ground of arrest has yet to be ascertained.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Falling sick...

After the PAC meeting yesterday, i went back to my legal office to settle some of the outstanding works for ½ hour.

I went home after that and there were some bad smell. Yaaaaksss, it came from my one year old Golden Retriever , Joe Joe. I have decided to bath him, and had forgotten my badminton game at 8pm. :-P

When i woke up this morning, i found myself having very bad sored throat and flu. The modus operandi told me that next thing to come would be fever and next in line should a 3 hours sleep. But before i manage to do so, i was already been taxed for RM59.00 at a Clinic in Fair Park, wow, so expensive.

I finished my PAC Press Conference this 11.30am, and now struggling to settle some of the office works again.

Start finishing my works. Shouldn’t be long before i get onto my bed for rest. Yeah!!!

I think i should be feeling better after speaking at Chenderiang Dinner which is scheduled at 7.30pm tomorrow. As i told MB Nizar before, speaking at the Ceramah is the best medicine. Your metabolic will go up and you will keep on sweating.

Update you all later of my tomorrow scedule, it should be more of a family schedule...

Thursday, March 26, 2009

Sidang Akhbar Berkenaan Dengan Keputusan PAC

Sidang Akhbar berkenaan dengan keputusan PAC:
Jawatankuasa Kira-Kira Wang Negeri Perak telah mengadakan mesyuarat pada 27.02.2009, 05.03.2009, 13.03.2009 dan 26.03.2009 yang mana telah kami membincangkan Dua (2) persoalan yang terbangkit, iaitu:-

(i) Pelantikan 3 orang Penasihat kepada YB Dato’ Dr. Zambry Abdul Kadir dan seorang Ketua Penerangan Negeri yang bertaraf EXCO; dan
(ii) Kedudukan yang tidak menentu yang mana YB Mohd Nizar dan YB Dr. Zambry masing-masing mengistiharkan dirinya sebagai Menteri Besar yang sah dan begitu juga barisan EXCO mereka.

Berlanjutan kepada isu-isu yang dibangkitkan, Jawatankuasa ini telah bersidang pada 03.03.2009, 13.03.2009 dan 26.03.2009 dengan memanggil saksi-saksi berkenaan untuk memberikan penerangan, penjelasan dan pandangan masing-masing kepada Jawatankuasa ini dan mereka termasuk: YB Dato’ Seri Ir. Mohd Nizar bin Jamaluddin (ADUN Pasir Panjang), YB Dato’ Dr. Zambry Abdul Kadir (ADUN Pangkor), YB Dato’ Ahmad Kamal (Penasihat Undang-Undang Negeri), YB Dato’ Dr Abdul Rahman Hashim (Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri Perak), YB Dato’ Jamaluddin (Pegawai Kewangan Negeri Perak), Dato’ Veerasingham, Dato’ Chang Ko Youn, YB Dato’ Hamdi dan YB Dato’ Najmuddin.

YB Dato’ Seri Mohd Nizar telah hadir pada 03.03.2009 manakala YB Dato’ Jamaluddin dan YB Dato’ Ahmad Kamal telah masing-masing hadir pada 13.03.2009 dan 26.03.2009.

Jawatankuasa ini berasa kesal atas ketidakhadiran YB Dato’ Dr. Zambry dan YB Dato’ Dr. Abdul Rahman dan 4 orang yang lain tanpa mengemukakan alasan yang munasabah.

Berdasarkan penilaian terhadap penjelasan dan keterangan yang dibuat oleh pihak pihak berkenaan, PAC mendapati terdapat unsur irregularity dalam pengumuman pelantikan 3 orang penasihat kepada YB Dato’ Dr. Zambry dan juga pelantikan Ketua Penerangan Negeri. PAC berpendapat bahawa prosidur undang-undang dalam pengumuman pelantikan tidak dipatuhi, tidak sah, dan keperluan dalam pelantikan tersebut adalah amat dipertikaikan; terutamannya dalam satu keadaan yang mana tidak ada peruntukkan undang-undang untuk pelantikan penasihat bertaraf EXCO. PAC berpendapat jawatan yang diwujudkan boleh diberikan kepada EXCO-EXCO lain atau Jabatan Kerajaan untuk menguruskannya.

PAC juga mendapati bahawa keempat-empat mereka telah menggunakan pejabat di SUK. Pegawai Tadbir juga telah dibekalkan kepada Dato’ Chang Ko Youn dan Dato’ Veerasingham.

Dalam isu ini, PAC mengesyorkan bahawa pelantikan, kalau dilaksanakan, jawatan-jawatan tersebut adalah tidak sah kerana tidak ada peruntukkan undang-undang untuk pelantikan tersebut. Penggunaan Pejabat di SUK pada semua masa material juga adalah tidak sah dan melibatkan wang Rakyat tanpa prosidur undang-undang dipatuhi, PAC dengan ini mengarahkan Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri supaya mengosongkan keempa-empat pejabat mereka yang berada di SUK dan menarikbalik sebaga kemudahan termasuk kemudahan kereta rasmi, sekiranya ada, dengan serta merta

PAC tidak ada bantahan sekiranya keempat-empat mereka ini beroperasi dari premis lain untuk apa jua tujuan tanpa menyentuh kemudahan yang melibatkan wang Rakyat.

Berkenaan dengan isu bahawa kedua-dua pihak YB Mohd Nizar dan YB dr. Zambry serta barisan EXCO masing-masing menyatakan dan mengistiharkan bahawa mereka adalah Menteri Besar dan EXCO yang sah bagi Negeri Perak, PAC telah pada hari pertamannya menyatakan ia adalah tidak bertanggungjawab untuk menentukan siapa adalah Menteri Besar dan EXCO yang sah.

PAC memandang serius berkenaan dengan siapa Menteri Besar dan EXCO yang harus dibayar gaji, elaun dan diberikan kemudahan-kemudahan dalam saat-saat genting yang tidak menentu ini. Demi menjaga wang Rakyat, dan mengelakkan pembayaran gaji dua kali, PAC mencadang dan mengesyorkan bahawa gaji, elaun dan segal kemudahan-kemudahan yang diperuntukkan kepada Menteri Besar dan barisan EXCO dibekukan sehingga krisis politik Negeri ini diselesaikan dengan adanya seorang Menteri Besar dan barisan EXCO yang 100% sah dan tidak dipertikaikan.

PAC akan memaklumkan keputusan dan cadangan kami kepada bahagian-bahagian yang berkenaan dan akan membawa laporannya yang disediakan ke dalam Dewan Negeri Perak untuk pertimbangan dan kelulusan.

PAC Meeting concluded...

We have just concluded the PAC meeting at 6.10pm just now. We have put up our findings and will definately let the Public know shortly.

State Legal Advisor leaving the meeting room...

The State Legal Advisor had just left after more than 1 hour staying in the meeting room...

State Legal Advisor giving evidence...

The State Legal Advisor, Dato' Ahmad Kamal, had just entered the meeting room and giving evidence.

PAC meeting

The Perak Public Account Committee Hearing is now on. Those present include YB Wong (Chairman), YB Leong Mee Meng, YB Annuar Sudin, YB Yee Seu Kai, YB Kesavan, En. Kamarul (Secretary).
---
At the moment there is no sign of presence by Chang Ko Youn, Veerasingham, YB Hamdi and YB Najmuddin.
---
The PAC is having its meeting while waiting the presence of the State Legal Advisor, who had earlier informed the committee that he will be late as he was engaged in a meeting in Kuala Lumpur earlier on.
---
The PAC will continue to sit and meet and deliberate on the issues raised. Those given chance to present himself but choose not to defend himself will have to accept whatever verdict passed by the PAC.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

PAC Meeting at 3pnm today

The PAC will hold the meeting today 3pm as scheduled. We have sent notices to State Legal Advisors, Dato' Ahmad Kamal, Dato' Chang Ko Youn, Dato' Veerasingam, Yb Najmuddin and YB Hamdi. The State Legal Advisor had informed me that he will be coming.
---
Let's see if we can conclude our findings today as the matter involves issues of Public Importance.

Sungai Tinggi on 24.03.2009




镇暴队员干扰座谈会

继前晚在吉打州武吉士南卯干扰人民公正党实权领袖安华依布拉欣演讲及逮捕31个与会民众后,警方昨晚以没有准证的理由动员七辆水炮车及上百名镇暴队员,驱逐回教党在霹雳州武吉干当双溪丁宜举办的座谈会。

吉打州武吉士南卯州议席及霹雳州武吉干当国会议席将在4月7日举行补选,提名日是本月29日,人民公正党及回教党极可能分别赢回这两个议席。

昨晚在座谈会在回教党双溪丁宜党部举行,吸引上千人赴会;座谈会从晚上九时开始,民联霹雳州务大臣及武吉干当国会议席补选候选人莫哈末尼查也到场演讲,不过人民公正党实权领袖安华依布拉欣并没有出现。

尼查演讲结束后匆匆忙忙离场,接着由人民公正党半港区(Hutan Melintang)州议员柯沙文(Kesavan Subramanian)演讲,但在他演讲中途,警方告诫不可在外边集会,也不能将用扩音器向外播放;工作人员于是扩音器移进,并疏导民众进入礼堂。

不过,礼堂无法容纳众多出席者,许多人因此还是站在外边听演讲。晚上10时左右,警方部署镇暴队员排列,要民众在五分钟内解散,理由是这是一场没有准证的非法集会。

这时,工作人员再度催促民众进入礼堂,气氛顿时开始紧张;警方也调动两辆水炮车停泊在回教党党部外的马路上。

警区主任拉惹慕沙指示民众解散,五分钟后再重复警告。民主行动党桂和区州议员黄家和等人多次与警方交涉,但警方还是坚持要他们解散。

回教党最终选择让步,要求警方允许更多时间让妇女及小孩离开。

10时25分左右,大批镇暴队人员展开驱逐行动,五分钟后民众都解散了。除了听到一些不满的声音,没有发生不愉快事件。

UMNO Polls, who?

Just received an sms says that it should be KJ and Sharizat.

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

Pre-Najib Premiership: Police State?

I was at Sg Tinggi, Trong attending a Ceramah organized by PAS. I did not know the way, but after i reached Changkat Jering Tol, there was a police Car - Nissan X-Trail in front of me. My instinct told me that i will reach my destination if i were to follow this car. Yes, i did.
---
There were at least 4 FRU trucks standby even before the Ceramah started. I couldn't understand if they don't have any other better things to do. After the speech by MB and YB Kesavan, the Police started to interfere and asked the crowd and the loud speakers to be confined into the Hall. Yes, we complied with.
---
Yet, after 10 mins, the FRU trucks starting coming forward and warning to disperse was given. I went to argue with them that we have complied with every order of the police with regards to the conduct of the Ceramah, yet, they have failed to keep their promise.
---
The Ceramah had to be stopped even before myself and Dr Lee Boon Chye were able to speak. When the crowd which comprised of almost 50% of women and chidren leaving, the FRU personnels marched on and started to shout. What is the point to do such provocation? People are leaving peacefully and yet the FRU are actually the one blocking the traffics and blocking the ways for the crowd to go out.
---
Come on, this is not a Police State!

Monday, March 23, 2009

Federal Court ruling

MB succeeded in getting the Federal Court to decide that it has no jurisdiction at this stage. All Court of Appeal and High Court Orders for both cases be set aside.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Latest from MB: Constitutional Questions and Federal Court

“And say, truth has come, falsehood shall, verily falsehood by nature is bound to perish” Chapter 17 Verse 81

On 13.2.2009, I filed a legal suit against Dato’ Dr. Zambry Bin Abd. Kadir (Zambry) in Judicial Review Application No. R3(1)-25-25-2009 (the Suit). Among others, I wished to clarify my position as the Menteri Besar of Perak and to declare that Zambry had unlawfully usurped the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak.

In particular, the main orders sought were:

a. A declaration that I am and at all material times the Menteri Besar of Perak.

b. A declaration regarding the interpretation of Article XVI(6) of the Laws of the Constitution of Perak that in the circumstances where –

i) the Menteri Besar of Perak desired, and advised that the Perak Legislative Assembly be dissolved;

ii) the Perak Legislative Assembly has not been dissolved;

iii) no motion of no confidence against the Menteri Besar of Perak in the Perak Legislative Assembly has been tabled and adopted; and

iv) no resignation from the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak has occurred;

whether the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak may be and/or had been vacated.

c. A writ of quo warranto be issued to Zambry to show cause and to give information how and under what authority Zambry purports to hold the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak and purports to act and/or carry out the responsibilities, functions and duties of the Menteri Besar of Perak.

d. A declaration that the Zambry has no right and/or does not hold the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak and is not the Menteri Besar of Perak at any material time.
e. An injunction to stop Zambry and/or his agents and/or his servants from acting and/or carrying out the responsibilities, functions and duties of the Menteri Besar of Perak.

I have called this media conference to explain the developments in the Courts thus far, and I hope you will bear with me as the points I am about to make are important. They are as follows:

1. This is not a suit against the Duli Yang Maha Mulia Paduka Seri Sultan Perak. This is a suit against Zambry. It is trite that the appointment of the Menteri Besar of Perak must be done in accordance with the Laws of the Constitution of Perak. Where there is a dispute in the nature of two appointments to a public office, both the appointees are lawfully entitled to seek the Court’s assistance to clarify the correct legal position. The appointing authority need not be involved in the dispute.

2. Let me explain. Quo warranto is a legal remedy to determine the right or title to a public office and to oust one who has unlawfully usurped or intruded the office, and holds on to the same. The usurper is asked to explain, by constitutional justification, whether he/she is lawfully entitled to the said office. If the answer is not satisfactory in law, the Court will oust the usurper by an order in quo warranto.

3. The remedies sought in the Suit are not unusual. The law reports of India are replete with cases of quo warranto challenging the positions of, among others, Judges, Prime Minister and Chief Justice. In Malaysia, there has been a successful challenge to the position of Industrial Court Chairperson in the case of All Malayan Estates Staff Union v Rajasegaran & Ors [2006] 6 MLJ 97, and the Courts have repeatedly affirmed this remedy in Lim Cho Hock v Government of the State of Perak, Menteri Besar, State of Perak and President, Municipality of Ipoh [1980] 2 MLJ 148 and most recently in Badan Peguam Malaysia v Kerajaan Malaysia [2009] 1 CLJ 833. Quo warranto is the appropriate legal route to clarify the constitutional impasse relating to the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak.

4. I filed the Suit after a comprehensive discussion with my legal team, and advice from them. The law is on my side. I say this because there are certain facts which are not in dispute, and because previous case law supports my position on the issue.
5. These are the undisputed facts:

5.1 I had advised and sought the dissolution of the Perak Legislative Assembly;

5.2 the Perak Legislative Assembly has not been dissolved;

5.3 no motion of no confidence against me in the Perak Legislative Assembly has been tabled and adopted;

5.4 I have not resigned from the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak; and

5.5 the Menteri Besar of Perak cannot be sacked or dismissed under the Laws of the Constitution of Perak.

To me, this means that I am still the Menteri Besar of Perak. If the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak is still occupied by me, Zambry cannot claim to be the rightful Menteri Besar of Perak because Perak cannot have two persons in one office of the Menteri Besar.

6. The legal and constitutional question therefore is simple:

(in the factual circumstances mentioned above,) whether the office of the Menteri Besar of Perak may be and/or had been vacated

If the answer to the question is in the negative (i.e. no), Zambry must be ousted from the office. If however, the question is in the affirmative (i.e. yes), then I am to be ousted from the office.

7. This is evident from the decision of Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Tun Abang Haji Openg and Tawi Sli [1966] 2 MLJ 187 (where the facts are similar to the case here) which states at page 194 of the report:

There are two occasions when the Governor has a discretion, that is, when he can act without, or even contrary to, the advice of the Supreme Council. Those occasions are in the performance of the following functions —

(a) the appointment of a Chief Minister;

(b) the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of the Council Negri. (Article 10 (2)).

As regards (a), nobody could be so foolish as to suggest that a Governor could appoint a second Chief Minister while there was still one in office.

(my emphasis underlined)

8. Thus, I filed the Suit with confidence that the law is on my side. However, recent events in relation to the Suit in the Courts have given me much cause for concern. These are my reasons:

8.1 At the High Court, and before the Suit was heard on its merits, the representative of the Attorney General (AG) urged the Court, on its own motion, to refer questions of law purportedly relating to the Suit to the Federal Court under section 84 of the Courts of Judicature Act 1964 for a speedy determination of the matter.

8.2 My legal team objected to this as section 84 does not empower the Court, on its own motion, to refer questions of law pertaining to the State Constitutions, in particular the Laws of the Constitution of Perak. Section 84 only permits questions of law pertaining to the Federal Constitution to be referred. As the Suit revolves around the interpretation of provisions of the Laws of the Constitution of Perak, section 84 cannot and does not apply.

8.3 Nevertheless, the High Court agreed with the AG and by an unusual reading of section 84 referred four questions purportedly relating to the Suit to the Federal Court.
8.4 The AG presented the four questions to the Court which were adopted in toto by the Court. My legal team objected to the questions, and said that the questions were irrelevant to the Suit and whatever answers the Federal Court may give will not be finally determinative of the issues in the Suit.

8.5 I appealed to the Court of Appeal. On 20.3.2009, the Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, and re-affirmed the four questions. Once again, my legal team objected, and stated that the questions are irrelevant. Even if questions are to be referred to the Federal Court under section 84, the only question is the question stated in the court papers of the Suit (i.e. in b. above).

8.6 These are the questions which are now before the Federal Court on 23.3.2009:

i. sama ada perkara Duli Yang Maha Mulia Sultan Perak tidak memperkenankan permintaan bagi pembubaran Dewan Negeri Perak di bawah perkara XVI (6) dibaca bersama dengan perkara XVIII (2) (b) Undang-Undang Tubuh Kerajaan Perak boleh diadili (“justiciable”)?;

ii. sekiranya jawapan kepada persoalan pertama adalah ya, persoalan seterusnya ialah sama ada perkara Duli Yang Maha Mulia Sultan Perak tidak memberikan perkenan itu sah di sisi undang-undang;

iii. sama ada pelantikan Menteri Besar Perak yang baru di bawah perkara XVI (2) (a) dibaca bersama dengan perkara XVIII (2) (a) Undang-Undang Tubuh Kerajaan Perak oleh Duli Yang Maha Mulia Sultan Perak boleh diadili (“justiciable”)?;

iv. sekiranya jawapan kepada persoalan di atas adalah ya, persoalan seterusnya ialah sama ada Menteri Besar yang baru itu dilantik secara sah di sisi undang-undang.

8.7 It is extremely interesting to note that while the Suit does not seek to impugn Duli Yang Maha Mulia or question Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s wisdom or discretion, the AG and the Courts have framed questions which relate to the actions of Duli Yang Maha Mulia. Duli Yang Maha Mulia has unfortunately been brought into the fray by the AG and the Courts. This situation is most disheartening to me.

8.8 Secondly, and as my legal team has pointed out in Court, I am concerned that the four questions are irrelevant to the Suit:

· Questions i. and ii. above relate to Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s decision to withhold consent for the dissolution of the Perak Legislative Assembly. In the Suit, I do not question this. I accept that it is Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s prerogative. I have stated this as a fact which I accept in the Suit (reproduced in b.ii) above) - i.e. that the Perak Legislative Assembly has not been dissolved.

Why is this question therefore framed for an answer to the Federal Court?

· Questions iii. and iv. above relate to Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s decision to appoint a new Menteri Besar under Article XVI(2)(a) read with Article XVIII(2)(a) of the Laws of the Constitution of Perak. Articles XVI(1) and (2)(a) reads as follows:

(1) Duli Yang Maha Mulia hendaklah melantik satu Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan.

(2) Apa pun Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan itu hendaklah dilantik seperti berikut iaitu:-

(a) Duli Yang Maha Mulia hendaklah mula-mula sekali melantik sebagai Menteri Besar pada mengetuakan Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan itu seorang ahli Dewan Negeri yang pada timbangannya boleh mendapat kepercayaan sebahagian besar daripada ahli-ahli Dewan Negeri itu, dan

(b) Hendaklah Baginda dengan nasihat Menteri Besar melantik tidak lebih daripada sepuluh orang atau tidak kurang daripada empat orang ahli-ahli lain dari antara ahli-ahli Dewan Negeri itu.

(my emphasis underlined)

In the Suit, I do not question this. I accept that it is the Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s prerogative to appoint the Menteri Besar after the State elections, and therefore on 17.3.2008, I was so appointed. But Zambry was appointed while I am still in office and not immediately after the elections. As such, it is clear as crystal that Article XVI(2)(a) read with Article XVIII(2)(a) are entirely inapplicable to our factual scenario. The said provisions only relate to the situation at the commencement of a new State Legislative Assembly where there is as yet no Menteri Besar and no Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan in existence.

Why is this question therefore framed for an answer to the Federal Court?

8.9 To reiterate, the Suit does not seek to question or impugn Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s prerogative or wisdom in withholding consent for the dissolution of the Perak Legislative Assembly, nor does the Suit seek to question or impugn Duli Yang Maha Mulia’s prerogative or wisdom in the appointment of the new Menteri Besar upon the resumption of legislative business after the Perak State elections. But the questions referred to the Federal Court - on the motion of the High Court, accepted by the Court of Appeal, and proposed by the AG - do. Why is this so?

8.10 To compound the problem, the question my legal team has framed in the Suit (reproduced at b. above) has been ignored. Why are the AG and the Courts unwilling or reluctant to decide on the question which has been framed in the Suit? Is it because Zambry will have no answer to it?

8.11 Thirdly, I find it quite unusual that the Courts have moved with great haste in referring the matter to the Federal Court, and without even hearing the merits of the Suit. I am all for an expedient resolution to the Suit, but it must surely be done in accordance with law. While the law under section 84 has been misapplied and misinterpreted (because section 84 so clearly does not permit the High Court and the Court of Appeal to refer questions of State Constitutions to the Federal Court), the referral process has in effect taken only ten days:

· 3.3.2009
High Court heard submissions on the reference point

· 10.3.2009
High Court refers the four questions to the Federal Court

· 12.3.2009
Federal Court informs parties about the hearing date of the reference to be held on 20.3.2009 (on 17.3.2009, the Federal Court informs parties that the hearing is adjourned to 23.3.2009)

This appears to be the first time this has happened in Malaysian judicial history.

9. In gist:

9.1 the four questions referred to the Federal Court do not mirror the real facts, issues and questions of law which are to be tried and which arises from the Suit;
9.2 the said questions are also irrelevant, and deviates from the real matters of the Suit;

9.3 the questions referred, even if answered by the Federal Court, will not definitively or finally decide the actual matters in the Suit and the dispute between me and Zambry as to the office of Menteri Besar of Perak; and

9.4 the reference made by the High Court will not assist in deciding the Suit justly and fairly.

10. I started by saying that the law is on my side. This is clearly laid down in the Laws of the Constitution of Perak and in the authority of Stephen Kalong Ningkan. I still maintain that the law is on my side.

11. However, and after witnessing the turn of events which has been most extraordinary and surprising, to say the least, it does not appear that the interpreters of the law or Zambry wish to answer the real constitutional question which forms the crux of the Perak MB impasse. Why is this so? And why am I being pulled through the Court process with the greatest of vigour on questions of law which are extraneous and unrelated to the Suit? Why is there an implicit, if not explicit, avoidance of the real question as framed in the Suit (i.e. reproduced in b. above)? Is it because there is only one answer to it?

The redress I seek in the suit will not be addressed if the Federal Court proceeds to hear and decide on the four questions and not the questions raised in the suit. I pray to God that good conscience and the oath of judicial office will be sufficient to guide and lead our beloved country away from the imminent step of the sacrifice and destruction of the Laws of the Constitution of Perak at the altar of illegitimate power, greed and convenience.

“And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you and you have no protectors other than Allah, now you would then be helped” Chapter Hud 11 Verse 113.

Dated this 22nd day of March 2009
Dato’ Seri Ir. Hj Mohammad Nizar Bin Jamaluddin

Update from the Tree of Democracy: Our auction...

The auction for the 5 broken pieces of the Democracy Plaque was concluded an hour ago at the Three of Democracy. There were at least 200 people there attending the historical auctioning event. Some had even said that the Tree of Democracy had become more and more healthy, and indeed everyone can see, flowers had started to grow.

It was a successful event, with the first set auctioned off at RM6,800, followed by the 2nd set RM5,200, 3rd set RM6,800, 4th set RM7,000 and the final set, at the price of RM17,100.00.

With the support from the People, there is no reason for us to back down. We will continue, for sure.

After started the day at 8.00am at Kg Simee, walking around with Kit Siang gathering the views of the People on the rebuilding issue, I have proceeded to attend the auction at 10.45am, and thereafter getting ready the press statement on the Federal Court Case issues by YAB MB. I have just got back home, it is now 1.28pm, will take rest for a while before getting off to my legal office to settle some of the outstanding works. By 6.00pm today, I shall be leaving Ipoh to Changkat Kruing for a 150 tables dinner, another hectic day….huhhhh…

Back from Kg Temiang




It is now 6pm. I just back from the Ceramah in Kg Temiang. I suppose to go to Bkt Gantang for the launching of PR machinery by Pakatan Yoiuth together with DAPSY Chief, Anthony Loke. Need some rest and also preparing the survey forms for tomorrow Simee market visit.


---


Tonberry, thanks for the invitation to the open house but i really cannot attend as the programs are really tight.


---


Share some photos at Kg Temiang with you all. Have a nice day.




Thursday, March 19, 2009

My schedule in the next 3 days...

The schedule for these few days are tight:-

20.03.2009

3.30pm: Meeting with Tn Hj Roshidi (Datuk Bandar Ipoh) over Simee Market’s Rebuilding issue
7.00pm: Attending a supporter’s daughter wedding open house at Klebang
9.30pm: Attending a wake at Kampar (my aunt’s father in law who passed away two days back)

21.03.2009

10.00am: ACA Report against UMNO’s money politics
3.00pm: Speaking at PAS Ceramah at Kg Temiang, Tebing Tinggi
7.00pm: Attending a supporter’s daughter wedding Dinner at Jalan K. Kangsar
10.30pm: Speaking at PAS Ceramah at Taman Cempaka, of course, Canning Constituency

22.03.2009:

8.30am: Visiting Simee Market with Kit and getting People’s views on the market rebuilding issue
12.00 noon: Have some time with family
5.00pm: Speaking at a DAP Dinner at Cgkt. Kruing, Mah Hang Soon’s village

Monday, March 16, 2009

Happy Birthday to Pakatan's Government and Nizar

Today is the 1st anniversary of the formation of Pakatan’s Government, where MB Dato’ Seri Mohd Nizar was sworn in. At the same time, today is also Dato’ Seri Nizar’s birthday.

There will be a special birthday celebration for both the events at 6pm today at a place non other than the Pokok Demokrasi, Ipoh.

Although the plaque had been sabotaged and removed eventually by MBI (whom i have strong reason to believe that MBI is facing huge pressure from the State Secretary to do so), the Pakatan spirit will last, forever.

Let’s join us in this special event!

Saturday, March 14, 2009

Back from Ayer Klah and Lawin

Huhh, just reached home and had a bath after coming back from Ayer Klah and Lawin together with MB Nizar. The Ceramah at Ayer Klah started at 6.30pm and thereafter we proceed to Lawin for another Ceramah organised by PAS at 9pm. We managed to sell almost 100 Malay rockets to a small crowd of 400 people. The Malaysian politics had changed ever since 308. It is nice to see our Malay friends holding the Rockets paper with a big rocket sign on the front page.

Friday, March 13, 2009

Tugu Democracy sabotaged for the second time in two days







I was at Tugu Democracy this morning and discovered that it was sabotaged for the second time in two days.






PAC meeting to be continued on 23.03.2009

The Perak Public Account Committee had met today as scheduled at 3.00 pm.

We have sat on 05.03.2009 where Dato Seri Nizar had attended and given his explanation and clarifications. The matter was adjourned to today to enable the other 4 persons, i.e. YB Zambry, YB Dato Dr Abdul Rahman, YB Dato Ahmad Kamal and YB Dato Jamaluddin Al-Amini, to attend and give their clarifications and explanation.

We are pleased on the professionalism shown by the State Finance Officer Dato’ Jamaluddin Al-Amini bin Hj Ahmad where he had attended today’s meeting and he had given his clarifications and confirmations on certain issues to help the Committee to address and deliberate on the two issues.

However, we regret to note that YB Dato Dr. Zambry and YB Dato Dr Abdul Rahman had again failed to attend and failed to response to my yesterday letter to them, where I have given them an opportunity to provide me a free date within 10 days time to accommodate their presence, provided the said notification reached us before the meeting started today.

As for YB Dato Ahmad Kamal, he had written a letter to me after my final letter notifying us that he will be available on 23.03.2009.

In view of the disrespectful act from Dr. Zambry and Dr Abdul Rahman, we have decided to proceed the meeting in their absence, and without hearing the evidence and explanation from them. Chances had been given, and we have been accommodatative enough to them. Enough is enough for us. We will not be hearing from them anymore. They have to accept the recommendations made by us eventually, and they have to be responsible for their absence.

At the same time, we have also inspected the offices of the three Adviors and Ketua Penerangan Negeri to determine whether the offices are being occupied and in operational. We have also obtained evidence and certain confirmations from the Pegawai Tadbir to Dato’ Chang Ko Youn and Dato’ Veerasingham, while no one was inside the room of YB Najmuddin and YB Hamdi.

We have adjourned the meeting at 4.50pm and we have decided to also call Dato’ Chang Ko Youn, Dato’ Veerasingham, YB Najmuddin and YB Hamdi to our next PAC meeting on 23.03.2009.

Tugu Democracy to be demolished by MBI

I have received news from a reliable source to the effect that MBI will be demoslishing Tugu Democracy which was already sabotaged this morning.

Thursday, March 12, 2009

PAC inquiry - tomorrow 3pm

The PAC inquiry is fixed on tomorrow, 3pm at Aras G, SUK.

Today, a group of Perak residents met me at SUK and handed over a Petition to me, calling the PAC to suspend the salary for Zambry pending the Perak crisis being solved. The Petition consists of 268 signatures and the PAC will take into consideration and deliberate on the issue tomorrow.

I have also received a fax from the Secretary to PAC, En. Kamarulariffin that he was under instructions to inform me that Zambry and the Three ex-officios are “unable” to attend the inquiry tomorrow due to “urusan rasmi kerajaan”.

The reason and excuse given was highly doubted and contradicting Zambry’s earlier stance. Zambry had in his earlier statement alleged that our PAC is unlawful and he quoted an British Text Book saying that the PAC cannot sit when the House is adjourned (I do not know where he learns this…). The fact is that pursuant to the Standing Order, the PAC cannot sit when the House is in sitting. It is the other way round. Is he going back to the British era and still treating them as mother?

Be it as it may, as I said at the very beginning, we will not stick to our stringent rules but rather we will conduct the inquiry in a more flexible way. However, there should be mutual respect. The integrity of PAC cannot be undermined.

As such, again I am giving them benefit of doubt, and had written all 4 of them a letter stating that the PAC inquiry should be given priority over other programmes. I have suggested to them that in the event they are unable to make it due to “urusan rasmi kerajaan yang tidak dapat dielakkan”, the PAC is willing to grant another date within 10 days time to ensure their attendance. We have to make it 10 days as the matter cannot be dragged on longer as the People’s interest needed to be protected. However, the request for a new date must be put in writing and to reach the PAC before 3pm tomorrow, i.e. the time when the meeting to start, otherwise it will only prove that they have no intention to attend. We will proceed to adjudicate and deliberate on the matters arising in their absence if they choose to absent themselves and kept quiet over the PAC’s offer for a new date.

Let see if they still have the little respect to the administration by law in this State.

Wednesday, March 11, 2009

How ridiculous it could be...

I was with Edmund Bon and Amer Hamzah having dinner at Bercham just now. They came down from KL to handle the case of the 3 “frogs” (in order not to insult and undermine a frog, we better put in Cantonese ‘lai ha mou’) by representing 3 Pakatan EXCOs being the intervener in the case of ‘lai ha mou’ against Speaker.

I was informed that there were 15 lawyers in the Judge Chambers, a room which the Bar table can only accommodate 4 lawyers the most. Yet, the Judge refused for the case being heard in open Court. First Question: why can’t it be opened to the Public?

I was further informed that a lawyer handling the matter for the Three ‘lai ha mou’ was very arrogant, even when submitting the case in front of the Judge. One even said outside the Court that “Who is Tommy Thomas (Speaker’s legally appointed lawyer)? What did he get for the 30 over years in practice? Myself 13 years already get a Datukship!” Perhaps, he could be the next Chief Jutice, who knows?!?

The Speaker had requested to represent himself in the matter and rejected the representation of the State Legal Advisor. The Judge rejected it. A person cannot speak for himself and was forced to retain somebody which he had no confident in. How can the Judge decide the lawyer for a person?
How ridiculous it could be?

Tuesday, March 10, 2009

Just Back From Tanjong Piandang




I just came back from a Ceramah at Tanjong Piandang, a small town near Kuala Kurau. Among those present include YAB MB DS Mohd Nizar, YB Mujahid (Parit Buntar), YB Yunus (Kuala Kurau) and YB Khalil Idham Lim (Titi Serong).


---


It is a good experience for me as it was the first time i managed to speak in bi-languages throughout the whole speech, with 40% Chinese, 40% Malays and 20% Indians attendees reflecting the muhibh and uniqueness of Malaysia, haha...

MACC inquiry...

i have just received a call from MACC Putrajaya at 4-05pm just now. An officer identified himself as En. Hisham had requested for my statement be taken with MACC.
---
I just wonder if there is a need to do so, after having recorded statement with Speaker and the counsel (yes, the lawyer) Mr. Augustine Anthony.
---
On my way to Kuala Kurau for a function at 6.00pm and i will be discussing with our panel lawyers on how to go about with MACC.

Monday, March 9, 2009

Sunday, March 8, 2009

Legislative Assembly (Privilleges) Enactment 1959




If the Police are not aware of this, I am providing for them a copy of the Legislative Assembly (Privileges) Enactment 1959 here. Para 3 of the Schedule clearly says that the elected reps are immuned from any civil or criminal proceedings. For those who are breaching it, please respect the Law.

Tugu and The Tree of Democracy







I brought my wife to see the Tugu and Tree of Democracy just now. To my surprise there were at least 15 people there, surrounding the Tugu and taking photos at the tree and also the baby trees of democracy.

After a month of struggle against Barisan Nasional, the People’s response had again proven that we are on the right track. BN can control the State Secretary, MACC, Police or even the Court of Justice, but we will have the People’s support and backing.

Thanks for the moral support given during the past one month. We will definitely continue to fight for the People’s rights. May justice be with the People.

Salam Berjuang, Hidup Rakyat!

Saturday, March 7, 2009

Majlis Perasmian Tugu dan Pokok Demokrasi

Majlis Perasmian Tugu dan Pokok Demokrasi akan diadakan pada 08.03.2009, genap setahun selepas tsunami politik 308 pada pukul 10.00 pagi bertempat di Medan Istana (Belakang Bangunan SUK) Ipoh. Semua adalah dijemput untuk menghadiri dan menyaksikan detik-detik yang bersejarah ini dalam sejarah Negeri Perak.

Friday, March 6, 2009

Police taken statement from me

I have recorded statement with the Police today. The statement was recorded pursuant to the police reports lodged against us in 4 different incidents:- (1) the complaint lodged to the Committee of Special Privileges; (2) Ceramah at Jelapang (3) Ceramah at Chenderiang (4) the emergency meeting under the tree.

I can’t understand why the Police need to be so rush in taking our statements. We are not robbers. We are not murderer. They have called us many times and only on Wednesday, I was being called over the phone for more than 4 times and even 3 detective officers came to my legal office to “invite” me for the statement recording.

I have reminded the Investigating Officer that I have lodged two other Police Reports, one against Khairy Jamaluddin and the other against mykmu.net. I therefore urged the Police to act fairly and to call them for statements as well.

Thursday, March 5, 2009

Public Account Committee Hearing: Only Nizar is present

The PAC had conducted an inquiry this afternoon at 4-15pm @ SUK. It is regret to note that only YB Dato Seri Mohd Nizar bin Jamaluddin was present and the rest of the person notice so served were absent. We appreciated Yb dato Seri Nizar's presence and co-operations during the inquiry.

The PAC feels that their absence, in particularly YB Dato Dr Zambry and YB Dato Dr Abdul Rahman, shown that they have no respect on the PAC. On the basis of mutual respect, the PAC had decided to deal with their absence in a flexible way and to call another inquiry next Friday 13.03.2009 3 p.m. for them to be present.

The details of their absence are as follows:-

(a) YB Dato’ Zambry: We only received his letter to PAC stating his protest on the proceedings and his intention of not coming to the inquiry shortly after we have concluded the inquiry at 5-15pm.

(b) YB Dato’ Dr. Abdul Rahman: Without prior notice, he had requested the Secretary to PAC to read out his two Paragraph statement which we feel is highly insufficient. No prior notice or courtesy call to inform the PAC that he is not coming.

(c) YB Dato’ Ahmad Kamal: The State Legal Advisor had written a letter to PAC to request for another date as he was in Kuala Lumpur for official duty. The letter was handed over to me by the Secretary to PAC only shortly before the inquiry convened.

(d) YB Dato’ Jamaluddin: We appreciated that the State Finance Officer had at least given me two calls on Monday and Tuesday to state that he will be sending his Deputy to attend and he said that the Deputy will be able to answer any question that we posed. However, to our surprise no one turned up eventually.

The PAC had instructed to inquire whereabout of them during the inquiry which was held between 4-15 pm to 5-15pm today. The PAC feels it is an utmost contempt of the PAC if the said person are indeed in the State Building and refused to attend.

Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Public Account Committee Hearing on 05.03.2009

The Public Account Committee Hearing will be held as scheduled at 4 p.m. today at Aras G, Bilik Mesyuarat Kewangan Negeri, SUK later.

Restraining Order against Sivakumar

After reading the Court order, there is nothing much in the Court and not as what UMNO lawyers put it to be. The order only retraining the Speaker from conducting any illegal meeting but all our meetings are lawful. As such, there is nothing restricting us to carry out our motions yesterday.

Writing from Tengku Razaleigh

To share with you all this interesting writing from Tengku Razaleigh.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The BN’s takeover of Perak has set off a chain-reaction of illegality which has left Perak quite possibly without a legitimate government. One of our most prosperous states has been reduced to a failed state.
---
One lie leads to many lies. Each bad action leads to a cascade of follies. Particularly when the lie or violation concerns something very basic. This is a principle we teach our children. It is a simple but universal truth now being demonstrated in Perak.
---
With each violation the sense of decency and restraint and the habits that bind us to the Constitution are loosened. The confidence in the rule of law that makes civilized life possible is diminished.
---
Laws are invisible things. They exist only when they are understood and observed. When the government of the day ignores foundational principles such as the separation of powers, the Constitution becomes a dead piece of paper. But the Constitution is not just any law. It is the set of laws that founds our nation, defines its basic principles, guarantees our individual rights and prescribes the structures, duties, and powers which make a national community possible. It is the foundation and source of the legal authority underlying the existence of Malaysia.
---
Those who so blithely ignore the Constitution for political ends are quite literally wrecking the foundations of this country to further their own interests.
---
This must stop.
---
The constitutional situation in Perak gets murkier by the day, with egos and reputations entrenched in hopeless positions. There is a simple and graceful way to clarify the situation definitively: return to the sole source of legitimate government, the will of the people as expressed through free and fair elections. Barisan might wish to show some magnanimity and confidence in calling for this.

Tuesday, March 3, 2009

Police calling us for statements

I received a call from C/Insp Wan Norashikin this morning at 9-50am that the Police requested me to record statement on yesterday incident. I asked her what is the police report all about and she replied it was in relation to the Report lodged by YB Khalil Idham Lim, Titi Serong (PAS) yesterday. Due to tight schedule, i have requested for the statement recording be conducted later as i need to clear some of the works in hands after 2 days not having been in the office.

To my surprise, the Ipoh CID Chief DSP Glenn gave me a call personally at 12.30pm and asking me to record statement. When i asked the purpose of statement recording, he replied that there was a report lodged by the police themselves on the smae issue.

Why is there a contradiction?

YB Thomas Su (Pasir Pinji) is now recording his statement at IPD. Some of the Pakatan Rakyat’s reps were already been called to record statement.

Blocking elected reps to enter SUK for official duty: who is guilty? Pakatan’s ADUNs or the State Secretary?

Restraining Order Against Sivakumar?

The Court had allowed a Restraining Order against The Speaker of the House, YB Sivakumar "from convening any unlawful meetings purportedly to be state assemblies" - Malaysiakini.
---
I am not going through the merits of the case here, but it was rightly pointed out by YB Kulasegaran that the State Legal Advisor cannot represent the "Government" against YAB Mohd Nizar in the KL case and represenitng the "Speaker" against "Zambry & its junta" in the Ipoh case.
---
It is a rule of ethics and practice of a legal professional that he cannot represent a client in a case whle he is acing against the client in another case. This is the basic professionalism that any legal professional has to adhere.
---
Doens't the learned State Legal Advisor know this simple principle which a first year law student or a reasonable man on the street will logically knows?

Monday, March 2, 2009

Police State! Police State!

* UMNO's blocking our way, why the police never take action?!?

* FRU: too rude, trying to stop us the elected reps to carry out our duties at SUK.

Sorry for unable to get more details for you all this morning, was stuck on the way to the Dewan which the Police had made a mockery over the Democracy system in Malaysia.




Share some photos with you all and hope can upload more shortly.




Latest: Our way to Dewan Sitting on 03.03.2009 No. 5

The Police and FRU are making a mockery of the democratic system in the Country while the State Secretary had technically declared a Public Holiday for all the staffs in SUK tomorrow, 03.03.2009.

From what they have done, it could be contemplated that we will not be allowed to enter the State Building. It is ridiculous if we, being the elected reps and representing the Rakyat, are being obstructed to enter the State Building tomorrow.

But we know, anything can happen in Malaysia. What Najib said will always be “colet, colet, colet”, and what Sivakumar said will always be illegal. Is this the Malaysia we are looking at after 52 years?

Public Account Committee




The Public Account Committee has issued notice to the following persons to attend the PAC meeting scheduled on Thursday 05.03.2009:-

(a) Dato Seri Mohd Nizar bin Jamaluddin;
(b) Dato Dr. Zambry;
(c) Dato’ Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri;
(d) Dato’ Penasihat Undang-undang Negeri; dan
(e) Dato’ Pegawai Kewangan Negeri.

The notice issued by the Secretary to PAC addressed Dato’ Dr. Zambry as the Menteri Besar which I already put on record in the previous meeting that the PAC is not recognizing him at this juncture.

Latest: Our way to Dewan Sitting on 03.03.2009 No. 4

The Barisan Nasional dare to do anything and everything, too much!!!
"A Perak government circular announces that the state secretariat will be closed tomorrow. It informs visitors that all appointments scheduled for tomorrow have been cancelled.
The state assembly is located in the second floor of the state secretariat and the closing of the premises is seen as a tactic to stop the convening of an emergency meeting by speaker Sivakumar at the assembly.
The circular is unsigned but carried the state government logo. "
"象征民联反扑的霹雳州紧急州议会召开在即,为了避免政权沦落,霹雳州国阵政府显然竭尽所能,采取一切法律及行政手段,来阻止紧急州议会的召开。
霹州秘书在今日先下手为强,宣布州政府大厦将在明日关闭。也在无形中关闭了,位于州政府大厦二楼的霹州议会厅。
州秘书处属下的管理委员会,是在今日张贴一张临时通告,宣布州政府大厦将在明日关闭,访客也被告知所有预订的会面将被取消。
这张临时通告,仅盖上州政府的徽章,唯并没有附上任何的署名霹雳州议会厅坐落在州政府大厦二楼之内,关闭州政府大厦大门的举动,已被视为是一项阻止紧急州议会召开的“竭尽一切”行政手段。"

Latest: Our way to Dewan Sitting on 03.03.2009 No. 3

BN-UMNO had just filed their papers in the High Court of Ipoh. We are still unsure what are the natures of the suit.

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Latest: Our way to Dewan Sitting on 03.03.2009 No. 2

It is learned that the case filed by the three “kataks” is fixed on 05.03.2009 for Hearing. What Najib said yesterday was that the Dewan Sitting should not be called because there are still doubts over the position of the three “kataks”. The question is, if he is of such an opinion, on what basis he got Zambry sworn in as the Menteri Besar? It was supposed to be 28-28, a tie where the Dewan should be dissolved!

On the other hand, it is also learned that BN-UMNO has yet to file any case in Ipoh High Court as widely reported by the media since this morning. In any event, I believe we are on the right track, with the People’s support, let’s go and fight against the Mighty-Machinery of Barisan Nasional.

Latest: Our way to Dewan Sitting on 03.03.2009

It is now shortly less than 21 hours to tomorrow emergency Dewan sitting. I was given to understand that Barisan Nasional (Zambry) had served a summon to the Speaker Dewan to declare the resignation of Three “kataks” valid. It was also said that there will be a Hearing on an injunction 2.30pm.

We will fight until the end.

Setiausaha Dewan's Statement on the legality of Emergency sitting: Those hide behind please make your stance and answer to the People

I have read this on Malaysiakini:-
"Kemelut politik yang melanda negeri Perak, selepas Barisan Nasional (BN) menubuhkan kerajaan negeri baru awal bulan lalu, terus berlanjutan.


Hari ini, Setiausaha Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) Perak, Abdullah Antong Sabri berkata cadangan Speaker V Sivakumar untuk memanggil satu sidang tergempar Selasa ni adalah tidak sah.

Katanya, ia tidak boleh diadakan kerana tidak mendapat perkenanSultan Perak berdasarkan Perintah Tetap Dewan Negeri serta Undang-Undang Tubuh Kerajaan Negeri Perak Darul Ridzuan.

Abdullah menegaskan demikian dalam satu kenyataan yang dikeluarkan di Kuala Lumpur hari ini."

I doubted very much on who is the true maker of the statement. Those who are the black hands behind please stand up and face the People. Don't go against the People's will. My sympathy on
Abdullah Antong.



To add more doubts over the issue, the statement by the Secretary of Dewan was issued in KL and without the SIGNATURE of En. Abdullah Antong.