by Wong Choon Mei
What hurt the nation was not Najib, for Malaysians know his limitations and do not expect better from him.
But they did from Sultan Azlan Shah, a very popular top judge in the late 1970s and 80s, almost revered for standing up for the people against the oppressive regime of former premier Mahathir Mohamad.
Sultan Azlan’s controversial decision - which also included a further unprecedented one of sacking Nizar as Menteri Besar - has sparked a slew of consipracy theories among the masses.
The favourite topics at the ubiquitous coffee shops across the nation include ones about Umno’s planted Trojan horse, and alleged plots between Najib and certain members of the royal family.
Nevertheless, experts and civil groups have been just as hard on the Perak Ruler and the BN.
Said Abdul Aziz Bari, law professor at the International Islamic University: “The problem in Malaysia is that the law is not allowed to take its course. I think the Sultan has made a mistake.”
Said Malaysia’s human rights body: “Suhakam noted that the Sultan of Perak has not consented to the dissolution of the state legislative assembly.”
Said KeADILan information chief Tian Chua: “Given that the Sultan previously wrote in his own book that a Ruler’s role is purely formal and that he should follow the recommendations of his Menteri Besar, that His Majesty himself could now chose to reject Nizar’s request for a snap election is surprising.
“If this was because the people of Perak were against Nizar, if this was to protect Perak against oppression, then there is cause for argument. But here, very clearly, the people of Perak want a snap election. They are not against Nizar either. So obviously, the question ‘why’ arises.
Now the way forward for Perak and its Ruler may have to be through a morass of legal battles and land mines.
It is tough for the Pakatan to back down, for it is no longer a question of losing the Perak state government, but at stake now is its entire national agenda of bringing justice and social reform to all Malaysians.
From Najib and Umno, most Malaysians believe there is nothing much to expect other than more mis-information, manipulation, plotting and intrigue that cannot be seen by the light of day.
“Najib has only confirmed what everyone thinks of him, but has not said out loud,” said a veteran party observer.
“He is not a fit leader for the country, and he knows this is the public feeling. This is why as far as possible, he will suppress any election anywhere in the country. Because he knows it is almost a certainty that he will lose, and he cannot afford anymore losses after Kuala Terengganu and Permatang Pauh.”
As for the Perak Ruler, it remains to be seen if his Majesty will heed the call of his subjects, his critics and his peers.
Said the political analyst: “Right now, the perception is that Najib and Umno are hiding behind the royal house. There are 13 states in this country and the Perak Ruler is considered to be the most enlightened because of his qualification as a federal court judge.
“If the Pakatan doesn’t chase up, the feelings of boldness in Najib and Umno to further encroach on the other royal houses will increase. Instead of growing transparency and better governance, Malaysians might end with greater oppression.”
Said a royal counterpart from the Kelantan house Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah: “Only the answer of the assembly counts, regardless of how many sworn statements, defections, press conferences and declarations, or what forms of advertisement, display, inducement or force you bring to bear on the question.
“The question must either be put to the people through state election, or to assemblymen through a formal vote in the state assembly.”
COMMENTS
Ironically, Sultan Azlan Shah, author of ‘Constitutional Monarchy, Rule of Law and Good Governance’, wrote this in his book:
“Under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted that the Yang di Pertuan Agong would not withhold his consent to a request for the dissolution of Parliament.
“His role is purely formal.”
COMMENTS FROM VARIOUS EXPERTS:
Abdul Aziz Bari, law professor at the International Islamic University
“The problem in Malaysia is that the law is not allowed to take its course. I think the Sultan has made a mistake.”
Bari said while it is the Sultan’s prerogative whether or not to dissolve the state assembly and allow fresh elections, the Sultan should not insist on the resignation of his appointed Menteri Besar, until it was clear he no longer held the majority support of the state’s lawmakers.
Malik Imtiaz Sarwar, human rights lawyer
“It could be said there is no situation of no-confidence here because of the dispute over the two seats (Behrang and Changkat Jering). A vote of no-confidence can only be taken by people who are legitimately entitled to vote, meaning people who are still assemblymen.
“As such, the legal basis of the Sultan’s directive may not be found.”
P Ramakrishnan, Aliran
“Legally there exist no doubts as to the vacancies of these two seats but there are clearly doubts as to why the Election Commission chose to take this decision which is without doubt ultra vires.”
“Aliran would also like to appeal to His Royal Highness, the Sultan of Perak, in all humility, to kindly consent to the dissolution of the state assembly as a way to overcome this deadlock.”
James Chin, political analyst from Monash University, KL wing
“According to the old British system, a monarch should always follow the advice of the Prime Minister, regardless of personal preference.
“The Sultan should know the law better than any of us, as he was formerly the Lord President of the Supreme Court
Tengku Razaleigh Hamzah, Gua Musang MP
“The Constitution makes no provision for his removal by any other means, including by petitions or instructions from any other authority,” said Razaleigh in a statement, adding that Nizar is lawfully the Menteri Besar until he resigns of his own accord, or is removed by a vote of no-confidence in a formal sitting of the assembly.
“Defections are not the basis for the formation of a government. Elections are. Governments are formed after citizens have expressed their choice through free and fair elections. Our constitution specifies a formal process for the formation of a government.”
”The two assemblymen (Behrang and Changkat Jering) whose allegiance we have suddenly gained are under investigation for corruption, while the Bota assemblyman’s justification for his record-breaking 10-day double-hop is an insult to the public’s intelligence and nauseating in its insincerity.”
Mahathir Mohammad, former prime minister
“Is Umno so desperate that it cannot wait for the criminal court decision against them before accepting them,” Mahathir wrote in his blog, referring to the Feb 10 corruption trial awaiting the Behrang and Changkat Jering assemblymen.
“If they are accepted now and then found not guilty, the so-called Umno-led government will be accused of influencing the court. True or not does not matter as the public’s perception is such. It will have an effect in the 13th general election.”
Khoo Kay Peng, political analyst
“Umno should prove to Malaysians that it is willing to change its ways. Accepting the two assemblymen, who are facing corruption charges, into its fold only shows it is digging in keep its old habits.”
Lim Si Pin, Gerakan Youth chief
“You are cheating the people as you think the voters are stupid. You are the representative of the people, how can you defect so easily.
“This is an abuse of the democratic process. Gerakan is against the party hopping culture and we do not support BN’s method of taking control of the Perak government by dubious means.
Lim Si Boon, Malaysian International Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Perak
“Elections are the prerogative of the (state) government.”
