Share |

Thursday, February 26, 2009

Sujatha's death: Kapar MP wants answers from OCPD

Kapar member of parliament M Manikavasam this morning filed an application at the High Court to compel the former Sentul police chief K Kumaran to answer several questions on his relationship with MIC president S Samy Vellu and his son Vell Paari.

manikavasagam lodge report sujatha kumaran kapar 211108In his application, Manikavasagam also wants the court to order the police officer to reveal why it took him a long time to investigate the death of television actress K Sujatha.

Sujatha died in June 2007 and Manikavasagam has for long been claiming that Vell Paari was implicated in the death. He further claimed that Kumaran was slow in investigating the matter as a result of his close ties with Samy Vellu and Vell Paari.

Vell Paari had denied the accusation and Kumaran had filed a defamation suit against Manikavasagam over the claims.

Manikavasagam's application sought for the questions to be answered at the next stage of the defamation suit. The matter will be mentioned on March 5.

Sujatha's inquest is set to be heard from March 16 to 18.

After filing his application, Manikavasagam also said that he would be going to the federal police headquarters in Bukti Aman next week to urge disciplinary action against Kumaran "for his relationship with Samy Vellu".

ACP Kumaran Request to Disclose Truth

Title: ACP Kumaran Request to Disclose Truth
Location: KL High Court ,Jalan Duta
Description: S Manikavasagam, Kapar MP will file an application requesting court to order ACP K. Kumaran (then Sentul OCPD) to reveal truth on Dead of Actress Sujatha
Start Time: 10:30
Date: 2009-02-26
End Time: 12:00

'CORRECT..CORRECT..CORRECT' LINGAM VIDEO SCANDAL - 4 OUT OF 5 MATTERS 'NFA'

After a sensational and beyond expectation Inquiry case of Lingam Video scandal, which reveal how lawyer S.K. Lingam had been brokering judicial appointments using top personnel like Datuk Seri Tengku Adnan Mansor, Tan Sri Vincent Tan and Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad.

With the full exposure of the video telephone conversation between S.K. Lingam and Tun Ahmad Fairuz Sheikh Abdul Halim on the plot of how this scandal had taken place.

During the inquiry, it was disclosed that Tun Eusoff Chin and his family had been 'holidaying together' with lawyer S.K. Lingam and family but facts were distorted with lies. Even Tun Dr Mahathir, the then Prime Minister claimed that he was 'unable to recall' circumstances to cover-up this scandal.

This 'high-handed cover-up' had seem to be predicted and with today's claim by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi through a written reply to Wee Choo Keong (PKR-Wangsa Maju) that the 3 of the cases were “deferred” to the Attorney-General’s Chambers, while one was marked “NFA” by the director of the legal and prosecution department in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission. Details of which were NFA were not disclosed.

Its time the Malaysian public demand a fresh investigation by re-opening this scandal and punish everyone involved in this misuse of power and by tarnishing the good reputation of our country.

Until UMNO-led Barisan Nasional government is replaced, justice seeked would NEVER happen.

MACC grills Perak Speaker for three hours

By Anilnetto

First, they put the pressure on Selangor MB Khalid.

Now, it’s the turn of Perak Speaker V Sivakumar to feel the heat. He was questioned by the MACC for three hours last night for alleged abuse of power probably in relation to the suspensions of BN state assembly members.

Meanwhile, Nazri informed Parliament yesterday that the ACA had opened four investigation papers into the Lingamtape affair. Three of these were sent to the Attorney General, who classified two under “no further action” while the remaining one was still awaiting further investigation. The fourth paper is still with the ACA.

In case you missed theSun report, here it is:

Sivakumar quizzed by MACC for three hours
Humayun Kabir

IPOH (Feb 25, 2009) : Perak Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar was questioned for three hours by two Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers from Putrajaya in relation to reports lodged against him for alleged abuse of power.

The questioning took place at the official residence of the Mentri Besar here from about 6.20pm to about 9.20pm.

“A very dangerous precedent has been set by the authorities in challenging the immunity powers of the Speaker as the rights of a Speaker have not been respected by the authorities,” Sivakumar told a press conference after the questioning.

He said as before when questioning by three state commercial police officers on Monday, relating to reports lodged against him for recent political and constitutional developments in the state, he gave his full cooperation to the MACC officers today.

“I acted very professionally during both the questioning sessions although they should not do this (to me) in the first place as the Speaker has immunity powers against civil and criminal proceedings for anything said or done,” he added.

It is believed that the reports were relating to Sivakumar’s suspension of Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six state executive council members from the State Assembly for 18 months and 12 months respectively for contempt of the House.

Last Wednesday, Perak state assembly’s rights and privileges committee chaired by Sivakumar handed down the suspensions, throwing the state deeper into a constitutional and political crisis.

Many constitutional lawyers have given their opinion on whether Sivakumar had the power to do what he did and Zambry has set up a legal team to advise him on his next course of action.

The only thing clear is that Sivakumar has to convene the state assembly to endorse the decision as the assembly was not in session when the committee met.

He had written to the Sultan of Perak last week for consent to convene a special sitting and he is waiting for the reply from the palace.

Sivakumar has also engaged the services of lawyers Chan Kok Keong and Augustine Anthony to defend him against the onslaught of the political turmoil that is raging in Perak now.

Earlier DAP Sitiawan assemblyman Datuk Ngeh Koo Ham had thrown a challenge to Zambry and his exco members not to take salaries during their course of rule of the state until the High Court decides on the legality of the Perak state government.

The Pakatan Rakyat exco members will do likewise, he said.

Ngeh said that only the legal state government should draw salaries and the rakyat should not be short-changed in paying both the BN and PR exco teams salaries.

–KENYATAAN MEDIA UNTUK EDARAN SEGERA–

–KENYATAAN MEDIA UNTUK EDARAN SEGERA–
25 Februari 2009

Hari ini, Rabu bersamaan 25 Februari 2009, Angkatan Muda Keadilan Malaysia (AMK) mengambil keputusan untuk menghadiahkan seekor lembu khusus buat Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) sebagai tanda ‘penghargaan yang tinggi’ di atas ‘kebebasan dan integriti’ yang telah diamalkan oleh badan tersebut.

Sepanjang dua bulan berlalu sejak SPRM dinaik taraf menjadi sebuah suruhanjaya, pelbagai kecelaruan telah pun timbul. Dalam keadaan puluhan malah ratusan laporan rasuah yang dikemukakan kepada badan tersebut telah dibakulsampahkan tanpa siasatan.

Penyelewengan yang dilakukan oleh SPRM ini, sebagaimana yang telah ditegaskan oleh AMK beberapa hari lepas, sangat bertepatan dengan kronologi usaha untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan-kerajan negeri Pakatan Rakyat.

Kalau ada kes rasuah dalam Umno , kes kes ini akan disurukkan dari pengetahuan umum.

Sebagai contoh dalam kes yang melibatkan rasuah oleh ADUN Umno-BN Lenggeng, Mustafa Salim.

Kes rasuah politik pemilihan Umno yang melibatkan Ahli MT Umno, Norza Zakaria.

Kedua-dua kes ini disorokkan identiti daripada pengetahuan umum. Bukan ini sahaja, malah banyak lagi kes yang telah dikemukakan baik oleh AMK mahupun komponen Pakatan Rakyat lainnya yang mempunyai asas yang kukuh dipinggir begitu sahaja tanpa sebarang status.

Justeru, lembu yang ‘dihadiahkan’ oleh AMK kepada SPRM akan menjadi batu tanda dan pengajaran buat SPRM agar mereka tidak berterusan menjadi ‘lembu yang dicucuk hidung’ khususnya oleh Umno.

SHAMSUL ISKANDAR MOHD AKIN
Ketua Angkatan Muda Keadilan Malaysia

Second Stimulus Package Factors In Deepening Crisis

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 26 (Bernama) -- Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak stressed that the second stimulus package will be worth more and be more comprehensive as the government has factored in the deepening of the global economic crisis.

"We have factored in the current external environment which is deeper and more serious than anybody anticipate," he told reporters after reading Prime Minister Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi's speech at the official opening of the D-8 Ministers' Meeting On Food Security here, Thursday.

He said the specific figures on the second stimulus package would be announced during the mini budget.

The first stimulus package unveiled last November was worth RM7 billion.

Najib, who is also Finance Minister, said there was a bit of time for the government to come out with a second stimulus package to ensure that the package was targeted and focused on the right sector.

"We have to go through the process. It is not just the timing of the package but it also to make sure that the package achieves its purpose. I think it is more important to make sure it is focused and targeted because there are countries which have announced fiscal stimulus packages but they are not exactly providing the expected results," he said.

Asked on whether the size of the package was adequate to the gross domestic product (GDP), Najib said: "We will try to do our best, bearing in mind there are other constraints as well."

UTHAYAKUMAR’S HEALTH : MASSIVE POLICE REPORT

ISA detainee P. Uthayakumar was not been given a proper treatment despite permission by the Session Court allowing him to take diabetes treatment and Police report lodged by his Wife, Indradevi.

Hospital doctor refused to admit P.Uthayakumar when he had a fever and suffered a bone fracture. He was not even given medication for the fractured bone. Doctor made an excuse of not having a bed available to not admit Uthayakumar.

Uthayakumar also had lodged a report at the Kamunting police station, saying he was not given treatment by the Kamunting prison authorities after hurting his leg. He also claimed that prison officers had ignored his request for treatment.

It’s Clear Morkery of Human Rights by Home Ministry , Health Ministry, Police Force, Prison Authority and comtempt of Court by ruling Government.

Calling all Malaysian to Lodge police report against such inhumanity by Government of Malaysian and all related authorities. Manikavasagam, Kapar MP expected to lodge his report at Brickfields Police HQ on 28-2-2009 followed by Human Right Activist and Individual whom concern on misusee of authorities.

Join us for the Better Malaysia Tomorrow.

‘Treat Uthaya or face protests’- Malaysiakini

Friends and supporters of detained Hindraf leader P Uthayakumar has warned that the authorities would be faced with street demonstrations should the latter not be given proper medical attention.

“If anything happens to Uthayakumar, the Malaysian Indians won’t keep quiet. We will fight (for his treatment),” Kapar MP S Manikavasagam told a press conference in Bangsar, Kuala Lumpur today.

For a start, Manikavasagam said that should Uthayakumar not be given any proper treatment within a week, “hundreds” of police reports against the authorities would be lodged on Feb 28.

Uthayakumar, a diabetic, has broken several toes on his left foot on Jan 31 while in the Kamunting Detention Camp.

According to his fiancee S Indra Devi, the swelling is worsening by the day and she fears that he may eventually have to amputate his foot.

“His ankle and feet is getting darker and the swelling is now an inch thicker than when he was in court (on Feb 3),” said Indra Devi, who visited Uthayakumar in Kamunting on Feb 14.

Authorities trying to ‘finish off’ Uthaya

She expressed disappointment that despite having visited the Kuala Lumpur and Taiping general hospital, he was not admitted and given proper treatment for dubious reasons.

“In the Kuala Lumpur general hospital, the doctor claimed he could not be admitted because there were no available beds,” she said.

While in the Taiping general hospital, Indra Devi claims that doctors said that Uthayakumar’s condition will “heal by itself” and he would have to return for check-ups in three weeks.

Indra Devi urged the authorities to allow Uthayakumar to seek treatment in a private hospital because she believed that the public hospitals were easily pressured by the police.

Another speaker at the press conference, Teluk Intan MP M Manogaran accused the authorities of knowingly endangering Uthayakumar’s health.

He claimed that Kamunting Detention Camp authorities were including excessive sugar in Uthayakumar’s meals, despite knowing that the latter was diabetic.

“The refusal of the police and prison authorities to provide him proper treatment, and not removing sugar from his diet, shows that the authorities are trying to finish him off in detention,” said Manogaran.

Saudi apartments deal riddled with discrepancies

AMK lapor semula aduan sejak tahun 2000

'Say no to gutter politics'

Nizar vs Zambry: Judge recuses himself

That’s correct... No action on three in Lingam probe

By Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani- The Malaysian Insider

KUALA LUMPUR, Feb 25 — Three out of four persons being investigated in relation to the infamous V. K. Lingam video clip case, have been cleared of graft charges, the prime minister told Parliament today.

Datuk Seri Abdullah Badawi told Wee Choo Keong (PKR-Wangsa Maju) in a written reply that the three cases had been marked “NFA” — which means no further action will be taken.

The file on one of the four persons originally investigated remain open. The PM did not name any of the four persons.

Abdullah said there was insufficient evidence to charge the three persons under the Anti-Corruption Act 1997.

The Lingam video clip was widely circulated on the Internet in 2007.

In the grainy clip, Lingam is recorded having a telephone conversation apparently with a minister and appears to be brokering judicial appointments.

The video clip which was recorded by Loh Gwo Burne, who is now the PKR MP for Kelana Jaya, sparked a major public outcry.

A Royal Commission was set up to investigate the videp clip but the findings were inconclusive regarding Lingam’s role in any alleged brokering of judicial appointment.

During the hearing, Lingam famously said “it looks like me, it sounds like me,” when questioned if he was indeed the man in the clip.

The V. K. Lingam video clip scandal was a significant contributing factor towards the Barisan Nasional (BN) government’s poor performance in last year’s general elections.

Four investigation files were opened by anti-corruption officers, the prime minister said in Parliament today.

Three of the cases were “deferred” to the Attorney-General’s Chambers, while one was marked “NFA” by the director of the legal and prosecution department in the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission.

Of the three cases “deferred” to the Attorney-General’s Chambers, two were marked “NFA” while the remaining case remains open.

Wee told reporters later that the director of the legal and prosecution department did not have the power to decide on a case but to only investigate.

“This is unheard of and first time as a lawyer. Why are they taking so long? The last time they said that the paper has already been sent but now they say it is for further investigation,” he said.

MALAYSIA: LICENCE TO KILL AND DOUBLE STANDARDS IN LAW ENFORCEMENT

In the past 20 years or so almost of all the citizens shot dead by the mono ethnic Police Force were ethnic Tamils. And in every case the Police have maintained that they either fired in self defence or that the victims refused to surrender and therefore had to be killed. Human rights lawyers however think that all these were carefully planned extra judicial killings.

In one case a 19 yr old unarmed ethnic Tamil college student was brought down by the Police in a hail of bullets in Seremban, a town in the state of Negri Sembilan. The incident which took place about four years ago was reported in the Govt controlled media as a case where the courageous police fired in self defence but lawyer Uthayakumar who is now wrongfully in detention under the obnoxious ISA laws was able to show reporters the bloodied T shirt the boy was wearing at the time of his murder. All the bullet marks were on the back of the shirt, which means the lad was running from the police not attacking them.

You must not be surprised that the Police continually kick the Law on its rear end. The present Inspector General of Police Musa Hassan admitted under cross examination by the defence in the infamous Anwar Ibrahim trial a few years ago that he would do what is illegal if ordered by his boss. And Raja Petra the fearless blogger who is contesting the Home Minister's order requiring his detention under the ISA has made allegations in his blog that Musa Hassan had symbiotic links with leaders of the underworld.

Recently a Malay woman working in a pub made a Police Report against Jamaluddin Jarjis a UMNO politician alleging that he had groped her at her place of work. Initial reports emerging about the incident said that he was 'tipsy' at that time. Now, commonsense and a sound system of Laws would require that Jamaluddin be be hauled to the Police station and his statement recorded prior to him being investigated for the offence but here in Malaysia a special mollycoddling law applies to UMNO politicians...... The poor woman after having made the Police Report had second thoughts: she took out a Statutory Declaration contra ing the report. Never in legal history has this kind of thing happened.

Mr Karpal Singh and other legal experts have said that there is no provision in the Law whereby a police report may be expunged by a SD. One cannot withdraw a police and if her report were false and malicious then she ought to charged in court but our Police and Public Prosecutors have not proceeded against Jamaluddin Jarjis or the unfortunate woman.

Some months ago Mr Karpal Singh made a police report against Zaki Azmi the Chief Justice wherein he accused Zaki of corruption but to date no statemebt was recorded from him and Zaki has not been investigated. But quicker than a flash of lightning the police have acted upon two reports made against him by UMNO in that he had committed treason against the Sultan of Perak. The venerable wheel chair bound Mr Karpal was asked to go to the Police Hqrs to sit through a 3 hr long interrogation. Naturally Mr Karpal is annoyed at the double standards,

Investors and tourists must understand that 2 kinds of Law operate in Malaysia. A harsh unbending system against the common citizen and a mollycoddling one which applies to UMNO leaders and their cronies.

Decent taxpaying citizens will become so frustrated with these double standards that eventually they may take the law into their own hands.

SIVARATHIRI MAKKAL SAKTHI

Most Viewed Images

P2230056

P2230056

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230036

P2230036

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230011

P2230011

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230005

P2230005

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230063

P2230063

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230046

P2230046

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 3

P2230013

P2230013

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230010

P2230010

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230034

P2230034

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230035

P2230035

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230009

P2230009

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230059

P2230059

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 2

P2230077

P2230077

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 1

P2230083

P2230083

Date: 02/24/2009 Views: 1


Photo taken at Ramalingeeswari, Bangsar. Kuala Lumpur.

Attended by S.JAYATHAS, UTHAYAKUMAR FAMILY INDRA, YB.MANIKAVASAGAM, N.SURNDRAN, SELVAM AND MAKKAL SAKTHI.SUPPORTER

Sultan has no powers to ask Nizar to quit

by NH Chan
Malaysiakini
20.2.09

According to the Perak constitution, the ruler has a personal discretion in the performance of two functions - the appointment of a menteri besar and the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of the legislative assembly.

On Feb 4, Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin, the mentri besar, was granted an audience by the sultan to request for the ruler’s consent to dissolve the Perak State Assembly.

The next day, Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak also requested for an audience with the sultan as the Perak BN chief and consent was granted for him to present himself before the ruler.

This is the account given in the Star, Feb 6:

“The four-page statement, signed by the sultan’s private secretary, Col Abdul Rahim Mohamad Nor, was issued at 2.15pm, Feb 5.

“It said Mohd Nizar had an audience with the sultan yesterday to seek the ruler’s consent to dissolve the state assembly. Earlier in the day, Najib, who is Perak Barisan chairman, had an audience with the sultan twice.

“At the audience in the morning, he informed the ruler that BN and its supporters now had the majority in the state assembly. The statement said the sultan had summoned all the 31 assemblymen before him to verify the information.

“‘His Royal Highness had used his discretion under Article XWI (2)(b) of the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution and did not consent to the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly,’ the statement added.”

Bernama later reported that Mohd Nizar was summoned to an audience to be informed of the sultan’s decision not to dissolve the state government.

Now what is wrong with that?

It is wrong because the sultan saw Najib without Mohd Nizar being present. Let me explain why it is improper for him to do that.

A fatal error

As a former Lord President, who was then the highest judge in the country, the sultan should know that it is improper to see an interested party alone without the other side being present before announcing his decision.

It was only after the ruler had seen Najib that he summoned Nizar to inform him that he had decided not to dissolve the legislative assembly.

That was his undoing. It was a fatal error. This is not a case of natural justice where both sides have a right to be heard. There was no hearing.

This was a request by a menteri besar to his sultan to dissolve the legislative assembly where, by the very fact of the application itself, he has admitted that he no longer commands the confidence of the majority in the assembly.

In other words, it is a request under Article XVI, Clause (6) of the Perak constitution. To such a request, the ruler has a personal discretion not to grant it under Article XVIII, Clause (2) (b).

The personal discretion to grant or not to grant must be exercised without any suggestion or suspicion to any reasonable outsider that he was partial to one political party or coalition of parties.

In other words, it is about the appearance of impartiality - justice should not only be done, but should be seen to be done.

And in the present context, what is the right thing to do?

Every judge, unless he is a bad judge, knows that the right thing to do is to apply the oft-repeated saying of Lord Chief Justice Hewart in R v. Sussex Justices, ex parte McCarthy: “It is not merely of some importance, but is of fundamental importance that justice should not only be done, but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seen to be done”.

As Lord Denning would have put it in Metropolitan Properties Co (FGC) Ltd v. Lannon [I9691 1 Q.B. 577: “The court will not inquire whether he did in fact, favour one side unfairly. Suffice in that reasonable people might think he did. The reason is plain enough. Justice must be rooted in confidence: and confidence is destroyed when right-minded people go away thinking: ‘The judge was biased’.”

When perception matters most

Now we know why the people of Perak and elsewhere in Malaysia, are making harsh statements about the sultan. A quick search on the Internet will prove this.

It is the perception of the people that matters; and the confidence of the people is destroyed when they go away thinking that he was biased - that he had been influenced by Najib.

It is very sad that Sultan Azlan Shah, who had been held in high esteem internationally and by the populace, has, in a careless moment, lost all that.

His reputation for fairness and justice has been shattered when they go away thinking that he had been influenced by Najib or that he has favoured BN. It does not matter whether he did, in fact, favour one side unfairly.

Suffice it that reasonable people might think that he did. The die is cast and we cannot put the clock back. Hereafter, there may be many who will no longer believe in his speeches on good governance and the integrity of the judiciary.

The impression is that he does not practise what he preaches.

When the menteri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly, he has two choices.

First, he may request the ruler to dissolve the assembly for the purpose of a state election. Second, if his request is turned down by the ruler, “he shall tender the resignation of the executive council”.

This is provided in Article XVI, Clause (6) which reads: “(6) if the Menteri Besar 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.”

What Article XVI, Clause (6) says is this: If the menteri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the legislative assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the executive council, unless the ruler has, at the request of the menteri besar, dissolved the legislative assembly.

However, in the present case, Mohd Nizar on Feb 4, had requested the ruler to dissolve the legislative assembly, and the ruler informed him on Feb 5 that he acted in his discretion to withhold his consent for the dissolution of the assembly.

That being the case, the menteri besar has no other choice but to tender the resignation of the executive council.

Cannot declare MB post vacant

Under Article XWI, Clause (2), paragraph (b), the ruler has a personal discretion to withhold his consent to the menteri besar’s request for the dissolution of the legislative assembly.

Unfortunately, the ruler, in the present case, has acted unconstitutionally when he side stepped the constitutional provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6) of the laws of the Perak constitution.

This was what he did.

The Sultan of Perak’s media statement said: “Mohd Nizar was summoned to an audience with the sultan to be informed of the ruler’s decision not to dissolve the State Assembly, and in accordance with the provisions of Article XVI (6) of the Perak Darul Ridzuan State Constitution, the Sultan of Perak ordered Mohd Nizar to resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect.

“If Mohd Nizar does not resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the state executive council members, then the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant.”

As we know the sultan is a constitutional monarch who has no power to rule except a couple of discretionary powers mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2).

So, apart from the couple of matters mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2), the Sultan of Perak has no power to order Mohd Nizar to resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect.

Nor has he the power to declare that the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant.

In the present case, the menteri besar had acted under Article XVI, Clause (6) which permitted him to request the ruler to dissolve the legislative assembly if he ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly.

In this case, the ruler turned down his request. Then the menteri besar has no choice but “to tender the resignation of the executive council”.

So, why did the ruler, in the present case, depart from the provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6)?

Under the provisions of Clause (6), the sultan knew that the ball was in the menteri besar’s court and it was to be the menteri besar who “should tender the resignation of the executive council”.

Yet he chose to ignore these provisions of the Perak constitution.

A pretended show of power

The ruler has defied the provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6) when he resorted to ordering the menteri besar to resign from his post when he has no power to do so.

The sultan knew, or he ought to have known, that under Article XWI, Clause (2) (a) the menteri besar is appointed by the sultan 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”.

This is what Article XVI, Clause (2) says: “(2) The Executive Council shall be appointed as follows, that is to say - (a) His Royal Highness shall first appoint as menteri besar to preside over the Executive Council a member of the Legislative Assembly who in his judgement is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly.”

So that when the menteri besar ceased “to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly”, and this is borne out by his request to the ruler for dissolution of the assembly under Article XVI, Clause (6), the ruler has the power to appoint another “who in his judgement is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the assembly” under Article XVI, Clause (2) (a).

It is a personal discretion of the ruler to act on the appointment of a menteri besar. Since the ruler has the power to appoint another person as menteri besar in place of Mohd Nizar based on his judgement, there is, therefore, no need to order him to resign at all.

This is no more than a pretended show of power when, in fact, there is no such power.

And if the menteri besar delays the tender of the resignation of the executive council as required by Article XVI, Clause (6), there is Clause (7) which provides: “(7) Subject to Clause (6) a member of the Executive Council other than the menteri besar shall hold office at His Royal Highness’ pleasure, but any member of the Council may at any time resign his office.”

This means that the ruler can sack any member of the executive council or all of them at any time.

In his book, ‘What Next in the Law’, the late Lord Denning wrote: “King James II was a bad king. It was he who favoured the Roman Catholics and was bitterly opposed to the Protestants. It was he who dismissed the judges.

“It was he who sent Judge Jeffreys on that Bloody Assize. It was he who directed that the Seven Bishops should be prosecuted for seditious libel - when all they had done was to present a petition to the king himself. It was the acquittal of the Seven Bishops that forced the King to flee the realm.”

It was a young barrister called John Somers who drew up a Declaration of Rights. Although very junior at the Bar, he had made a short speech of five minutes which led to the acquittal of the Seven Bishops. Immediately after that trial, he was entrusted with the task of preparing a Declaration of Rights - to which the new King William assented.

This Declaration became the Bill of Rights 1689. It is not easy to lay your hand on any book which contains the full text of this great document. I will set out here a few of the principle clauses (for the present purpose I will only refer to clauses 1 and 2):

‘The Lords and Commons…

I … (as their ancestors in like case have usually done) for the vindicating and asserting their ancient rights and liberties, declare:

1. That the pretended power of suspending laws, or the execution of by regal authority, without consent of parliament, is illegal.

2. That the pretended power of dispensing with laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal.

II … That William and Mary prince and princess of Orange be, and be declared, King and Queen of England…’

UK’s Bill of Rights

Macaulay, in his ‘History of England’ (Volume III) described the importance of the Bill of Rights in these words: “The Declaration of Right, though it made nothing law which had not been law before, contained the germ … of every good law which has been passed … of every good law which may hereafter, in the course of ages, be found necessary to promote the public weal, and to satisfy the demands of public opinion.”

If we are to have a new Bill of Rights, will it too be the germ of the law which, in the complexities of modern society, maintain the rights and freedoms of the individual against the all-powerful bodies that stride about the place?

I shall now return to the subject matter of this article.

I have borrowed the title of it from the second clause of the Declaration of Rights as drafted by the young barrister John Somers. Clause 2 reads:

“That the pretended power of dispensing with laws, or the execution of laws, by regal authority, as it hath been assumed and exercised of late, is illegal.”

The above quotation should serve as a fitting reminder that the laws of the land, more so the Perak constitution, should not be sidestepped by the ruler or, to quote from Lord Denning, by “the all-powerful bodies that stride about the place”.

If anyone thinks that he can dispense with the law for the execution of it, then this clause should remind them that the power to do so is only a pretended power. Article XVI, Clause (6) is what we are talking about here - the menteri besar should be allowed to tender the resignation of the Executive Council in due course of time without being hurried by regal authority exercising a pretended power.

The laws of the Perak constitution should be administered even-handedly and not unequally by giving the impression to the general public that preferential treatment was shown to some persons.

It is the appearance of impartiality that matters. It does not matter whether he did, in fact, favour one side unfairly. Suffice it that reasonable people might think that he did.

Substitute the phrase “by regal authority” for the phrase “by those in power” and we have an axiomatic rendering which applies to today’s modern society.

The executive branch of any government, be it federal, state or local, cannot ignore the people’s call for justice and fair play which throughout the ages have been “found necessary to promote the public weal, and to satisfy the demands of public opinion”.

The call of public opinion is a call to maintain “the rights and freedoms of the individual against the all-powerful bodies that stride about the place”. The executive branch of any government can ignore the voice of public opinion at its peril.

Unwillingness to heed the demands of public opinion can lose the mandate of the populace in the next election.

I think the writing is already on the wall. The demands of public opinion is a universal one. If the old order has been found wanting, it must give way to the new.

——————————————————————————–
NH CHAN, who is former Court of Appeal judge, lives in Ipoh.

ICAC’s praise for MACC “a good start for Malaysia to battle graft” – a supreme insult!

The Star headline, “Good start, says Hong Kong’s ICAC”, quoting the deputy commissioner and head of operations of Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) Daniel Li for the creation of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officially launched by the Prime Minister, Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi yesterday is no real praise but a supreme insult causing self-respecting Malaysians to cringe at such a serious indictment of Malaysia’s anti-corruption record whether in the 22-year premiership of Tun Dr. Mahathir Mohamad or the five-year Abdullah premiership.

When the Anti-Corruption Agency (ACA) was founded in 1967 under the first Director-General Tan Sri Harun Hashim, the ACA’s public standing as an independent anti-corruption agency both regionally and internationally was highest in its 41-year history.

Unfortunately, after Tan Sri Harun Hashim’s tenure, the ACA had not been able to build on the public confidence enjoyed by the ACA.

Otherwise, the ACA should have become a premier anti-corruption body in the world instead of allowing the Hong Kong International Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) which was formed seven years after the ACA in 1974 to establish the international reputation as one of the best known and successful organisations dedicated to addressing issues of corruption in both the public and private sectors, to the extent that the Malaysia has to learn from ICAC, when it should be Hong Kong having to learn from the ACA!

This is the second time that Malaysia is trying to emulate ICAC. The results of the first effort when the Anti-Corruption Act 1997 was enacted had been disastrous with Malaysia taking a nosedive from No. 26 in the 1996 Transparency International (TI) Corruption Perception Index (CPI), falling 21 places in 12 years to No. 47 in the 2008 TI CPI.

In this period, Malaysia had deteriorated both in CPI ranking and score, with ranking slipping from No. 26 to No. 47 while the CPI score fell from 5.32 in 1996 to 5.1 in 2008 (10 perceived as “highly clean” while 0 perceived as “highly corrupt).

In contrast, other Asian countries have either improved both their rankings or scores or both, viz:


1996 2008
Singapore 7 (8.80) 4 (9.2)
Hong Kong 18 (7.01) 12 (8.1)
Japan 17 (7.05) 18 (7.3)
Taiwan 29 (4.98) 39 (5.7)
South Korea 27 (5.02) 40 (5.6)
Malaysia 26 (5.32) 47 (5.1)

Will Malaysia’s ranking and score in TI Corruption Perception Index fall even lower with the MACC Act, just as they fell even lower from 1997-2008 after the passage of the Anti-Corruption Act 1997?

The very fact that this question is posed at the very start of the MACC is a reflection of the failure of the MACC to command unquestioned national and international confidence in its independence, impartiality and professionalism in its first six weeks of operation – particularly with the bias and unprofessionalism shown by the MACC Chief Commissioner Datuk Seri Ahmad Said Hamdan in his comment on the “car and cows” investigation involving the Selangor Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim.

The MACC Deputy Commissioner Datuk Abu Kassim Mohammad missed the point altogether about the critical importance of maintaining public confidence in the MACC’s independence, impartiality and professionalism when he came to the defence of the Chief Commissioner, claiming that Ahmad Said had acted within the law when he commented about the Selangor Mentri Besar.

Can Ahmad Said cite a single instance where he had done the same thing with regard to corruption investigations involving top Barisan Nasional leaders?

‘Singh is King’: Karpal causes uproar again

Bernama, Feb 25 2009

The use of the words "Pemuda Umno Celaka" (Damn Umno Youth) by Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) caused a major uproar in the Dewan Rakyat today.

Karpal, who is also DAP chairman, at first had taken to task the over 100 police reports lodged against him for stating that he would sue the Sultan of Perak following the political crisis in Perak.


Debating the motion of thanks for the Royal address, he then went on to say:" This might be a world record. Two bullets, Mr. Speaker. Under Section 57of the Internal Security Act, if a person is in possession of even a single bullet and is found guilty, he or she is liable to face the death penalty. I want to know where this "Umno Youth celaka" got two bullets."

This drew the ire of Dr Mohd Puad Zarkashi (BN-Batu Pahat) and Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan (BN-Kota Belud) who immediately got up and demanded Karpal withdrew the unsuitable word.

"Pemuda Umno celaka. Don''t disturb me," Karpal continued causing the Dewan to descend into chaos and Deputy Datuk Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar reprimanding Karpal not to use the words again.
Karpal, however, ignored it and repeated the words but retracted them after Wan Junaidi directed him not to do so.

In his parting shot, he gave Umno Youth a warning saying," Don't mess around with me. Singh is King," echoing the title of a recently released Bollywood movie.

On his recent criticisms of Opposition leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, he said he accepted Anwar as the head of the opposition coalition and any misunderstanding between them was "none of the Barisan Nasional's business".

He also asked the chief of the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission to withdraw his remarks about an alleged corruption case involving Selangor Menteri Besar, Tan Sri Abdul Khalid Ibrahim.

He cited Section 58 of the MACC Act which stipulated that "no prosecution shall be prosecuted except from the consent of public prosecutor".

Murder victim found in trader's 50-year-old grave

PORT DICKSON: Police dug up a 50-year-old grave to exhume the remains of a murder victim who was shot dead in Kuala Lumpur in November last year.

R. Gunaseelan's body was placed on top of the 50-year-old remains of a businessman from Port Dickson who had died of tuberculosis and was buried in the grave at the Taman PD Utama Chinese cemetery half a century ago.

Investigations revealed that Gunaseelan, 35, was a member of Gang 08 and was shot dead by another gang member, following an argument in an apartment in Cheras on Nov 10.

Kuala Lumpur deputy Criminal Investigation Department chief Assistant Commissioner Abdul Aziz Zakaria said the killer had called on a grave digger at the cemetery and asked him to dig a grave to bury the victim for a RM500 fee.

The grave-digger, however, was believed to have taken the easy way out and placed Gunaseelan's body in an occupied grave.
Gunaseelan's family had lodged a missing person's report shortly after he was killed and police investigations revealed that he was linked to Gang 08.

Police had been on the trail of the Gang 08 members for several months and got their break when they arrested nine members of the gang and seized two pistols recently.

In follow-up operations, two others were nabbed. One of them, whom police believed shot Gunaseelan, was picked up in Penang recently.

Following interrogation, the suspect from Penang led police to the grave in Taman PD Utama on Monday.

Yesterday, upon obtaining a court order, a police forensic team and pathologists from Hospital Universiti Kebang-saan Malaysia (HUKM) exhumed Gunaseelan's remains.

His remains were identified by his brother.

Gunaseelan's face and upper body were covered with cement to prevent animals from digging into the shallow grave.

Forensics personnel took more than three hours to look for clues and remove the body from the grave.

Also present at the cemetery were the murder suspect, the grave-digger, and relatives of both Gunaseelan and the businessman who had died 50 years ago.

Abdul Aziz said the case has been classified as murder.

Meanwhile, businessman, Chua Keng Hong, 73, the son of the man whose grave had been dug up, said he was shocked to learn that a body had been buried in his father's grave.

"I was mystified when police called me at 6pm on Monday, to inform me that they suspected a murder victim was buried in my father's grave," said Chua who lives in Kampung Arab, here.

"There are more than a hundred graves here. I don't understand why they chose to bury the man in my father's grave."

You decide, Khalid!

By Rocky's Bru

NST 25/02: Selangor Sultan not giving advice on Elizabeth Wong's case yet as cops still probing nude pix. Leaves it to MB to decide

25/2 Selangor Sultan is above politics; will leave it to MB Khalid to decide fate of exco Elizabeth Wong, now abroad following photo scandal/STAR

Passing the buck back. Why anyone thinks that the Sultan of Selangor should decide on Eli Wong's future beats me. I was quite anxious as to how the HRH would decide. You know, damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. We still remember Sultan Perak's Dilemma, don't we?

The full press statement by the Sultan of Selangor, Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah, over the controversy involving Bukit Lanjan state assemblyman Elizabeth Wong, issued by his private secretary, Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani

“I am pleased to inform that Yang Amat Berhormat Tan Sri Dato’ Abdul Khalid Bin Ibrahim, the Dato’ Mentri Besar Selangor has sought an audience with His Royal Highness, The Sultan of Selangor, on Wednesday, 25th February 2009 and duly informed His Royal Highness on the political development and the issue which involved Yang Berhormat Elizabeth Wong Keat Ping, the Selangor State Assemblyman for Bukit Lanjan who is also the State Selangor Exco Member.

His Royal Highness, The Sultan of Selangor, has commanded me to inform that His Royal Highness could not offer any guidance or advice to the Yang Berhormat Dato’ Menteri Besar of Selangor in the matter related to the issue of Yang Berhormat Elizabeth Wong Keat Ping as it was still under police investigation and it involved her political position. It is His Royal Highness’ stance as the Sultan of Selangor to be above politics.

His Royal Highness believes that whatever decision that is going to be made by the Yang Amat Berhormat Dato’ Mentri Besar of Selangor will made with accurateness, fair and with wisdom by taking into consideration the interest of the Rakyat in particular and the State of Selangor generally. His Royal Highness is upset and worried as of late the intrusion of someone’s privacy and private rights was being used to destroy one’s dignity and reputation. It is a sad thing as one’s life and private rights were being made public and subject to public scrutiny by publicising in the mass media.

To Yang Berhormat Elizabeth Wong, His Royal Highness felt sad and sympathised with her as to the unfortunate event she had suffered and hoped that Yang Berhormat Elizabeth Wong will remain calm and be patient in continuing with her life henceforth.”

Dato’ Haji Mohamad Munir bin Bani Dato’ Lela Bakti Private Secretary to His Royal Highness The Sultan Of Selangor

Aid Programme Intensified During Economic Slowdown

TELUK INTAN, Feb 25 (Bernama) -- Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi said all ministries and government agencies have been asked to intensify aid programmes so that those who were facing problems as a result of the economic slowdown receive appropriate assistance.

"During the difficult period, it is hoped that this (assistance) will ease their burden," the Prime Minister told reporters after launching the Federal Welfare Aid's Social Security Network Card, here on Wednesday.

He said such aid should not only be channelled to the poor and the disabled, but those who were hard pressed due to economic difficulties.

A comprehensive aid programme encompassing the agricultural, industrial and housing sectors should be intensified so that the groups who truly needed assistance were not sidelined, he said.

"We want to raise capacity so that they will have jobs and can set up their own enterprises," he said.

On the Federal Welfare Aid's Social Security Network Card, Abdullah said the initiatives taken by the Women, Family and Community Development Ministry was aimed to ensure that all the target groups would enjoy the benefits provided.

Among others, the programme targeted the hardcore poor, the disabled, the aged and children.

"What is important is that besides the financial aid, other programmes are also being carried out to build their capacity in terms of housing, employment and their own enterprises in agriculture and so on," he said.

Meanwhile in another development, the Prime Minister said the opposition actually liked to make up stories aimed at sensationalising the issues.

"They make up all kinds of stories to make it exciting...assumptions and accusations are made which should not be entertained and exaggerated," he said.

He said this when commenting on the claim by two State Assemblymen from the opposition coalition in Perak that they had received offers of up to RM20 million and positions if they were to become independent assemblymen or join the Barisan Nasional (BN).

The two Assemblymen, Keshvinder Singh (DAP-Malim Nawar) and Abdul Yunus Jamsani (PKR-Kuala Kurau) lodged reports to the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) in Ipoh on Wednesday.

On preparations to face the three simultaneous by-elections, Abdullah, who is also the BN chairman, said equal emphasis would be given to all the constituencies contested by the BN.

The by-election for the Bukit Gantang parliamentary seat in Perak and Bukit Selambau state constituency in Kedah would be held simultaneously on April 7 while the Election Commission (EC) would set the date for the Batang Ai state constituency in Sarawak next week.

When asked on the existence of camps among candidates contesting in the Umno election next month, Abdullah, who is also Umno president, said there should not be any factions.

"There shouldn't be any camps, all the candidates are known to the members (delegates). They can decide...no need to campaign," he said.

Pakatan Perak reps: We were offered millions to quit - Malaysiakini

Two Pakatan Rakyat state assemblypersons today filed a report with the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) claiming that they were offered millions of ringgit to quit their respective parties and become Independents or join Barisan Nasional (BN).

MCPX

According to a Bernama report, DAP's Keshvinder Singh (Malim Nawar) and PKR’s Abdul Yunus Jamsari (Kuala Kurau) filed the report at the MACC office in Ipoh.

keshvinder singhSpeaking to reporters later, Keshvinder claimed that he had received various offers from numerous agents claiming to represent Deputy Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak.

One of the agents, he said, was a local freelance journalist with the Chinese media.

The DAP leader claimed that he was offered RM20 million to quit his party and declare himself as an Independent as well as express support for BN.

The lawyer-turned-politician also said he had received other offers such as the prospect of being appointed Perak MIC chief if he joined the BN component party as well as being appointed a state executive councillor.

He said the exco appointment offer was the latest offer since the BN seized control of the state government earlier this month.

"I urge Najib to come forward and explain the matter because this shows that the federal government is corrupt and desperate," he added.

Logging concessions

Abdul Yunus claimed that he was offered cash of between RM3 million and RM8 million.

slim majority in perak update 040209He also said he was offered logging concessions if he quit his party.

He alleged that the offer was made by several agents comprising businessmen who claimed to be representing the Perak BN leadership.

When lodging the police report, the duo were accompanied by seven Pakatan Rakyat representatives - Ramli Tusin (Semanggol), A Sivasubramaniam (Buntong), Chan Ming Kai (Simpang Pulai), Chang Lih Kang (Teja), Sum Cheok Leng (Bercham), Leong Mee Meng (Jalong) and Khalil Idham Lim Abdullah (Titi Serong).

BN took control of the state after four Pakatan Rakyat representatives quit their respective parties. Three later declared themselves 'BN-friendly' Independents while the other rejoined Umno.

Zambry chairs exco meeting

Meanwhile in Teluk Intan, BN Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six state exco members held their meeting at the Hilir Perak district office.

dr zambry abdul kadir new perak cm 110209 03Zambry later told reporters that the state government had decided to hold the exco meeting in each of the districts in the state on rotation basis.

This is to enable all exco members to better appreciate the problems of the people at the grassroots level, he added.

At the exco meeting today, Zambry said that the annual vacation allowance of RM20,000 for each of the six exco members will be withdrawn and utilised to overcome the people's problems.

He said it would not be appropriate for the allocation of RM120,000 to be used as vacation allowance in the wake of the uncertain economic situation currently.

"The money will instead be utilised for the people who are in need," he was quoted as saying in Bernama.