I have made several remarks concerning the Perak MB's crisis. I am not changing the stand that I am taking of which I disagree with the finding of the court that it is suffice by the action of the Royal to pick a new Menteri Besar that at the same time it causes the effectiveness of non-confidence motion against the previous Menteri Besar.
The court on that particular situation was faced with the question whether the appointment of the new MB is valid in the absence of the motion of vote of no confidence. The court decided on behalf of the Barisan Nasional that appointment alone suffice to constitute that the previous MB have lost its majority. It was reasoned that extraneous circumstances revolving in Perak in connection of the event of the appointment is sufficient to consider that the previous MB have lost his majority.
There was reference made to the case in Sabah or Sarawak where a particular State Minister challenge the validity of resignation of the Chief Minister, in which he argued that only through the vote of no-confidence that can show a State Chief Minister cease from office, as such the court on the Perak's MB case, decided that in this situation the fact that the Chief Minister resigned is the extraneous circumstances taken to constitute that the Chief Minister cease to have office.
The application of this case is rebuttable in its application to the case concerning the Perak's MB crisis where the case which was relied on is where the Chief Minister tendered resignation letter but in Perak, there was no resignation letter tendered, as such if the correct interpretation of this case were to be used, it can be deduced that in event where there was no voluntary resignation made, extraneous circumstances cannot be applied, this the act of appointing the new MB is invalid.
On the vote of no confidence, this is the only method available to oust an Executive leader in a parliamentary system, when he refuses to resign when he does not command the support of the majority, this is the position provided by numerous Indian cases that I can't remember their names. So, here, although that BN in Perak may have the majority of assemblymen, they must put foward the motion of no-confidence as this is the only way to constitute a valid sacking of the current Menteri Besar of Perak, only through this manner that the respect upon the rights of the people in Perak is honoured, through the trust that they have placed in their representatives.
But since, the act of the Royal to appoint new MB is where the court bases its support, clearly the decision made transgressing the rights of the people of which this country belongs to. It defeats democracy and allows Royal anarchy in this country that supposed to have been a constitutional monarchy. I never disputed the right of the Royal to select the MB of their own choice but that can only be done after the decision of the people is honored.
I have a few videos that I have taken from the UMNO official website, judging the conduct of Pakatan Rakyat members in response of their protest over the appointment of the new BN's MB. I think their conduct is something so extreme and should have not happened, it is such a regret from them to be selected, but despite their conduct what should prevail is the right of the people.
Please correct or add my supportive authority, I am not at the luxury of time to make extensive research...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vusiidBzjZc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyqHgzBh5F4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB5-vxtzItI&feature=related
The court on that particular situation was faced with the question whether the appointment of the new MB is valid in the absence of the motion of vote of no confidence. The court decided on behalf of the Barisan Nasional that appointment alone suffice to constitute that the previous MB have lost its majority. It was reasoned that extraneous circumstances revolving in Perak in connection of the event of the appointment is sufficient to consider that the previous MB have lost his majority.
There was reference made to the case in Sabah or Sarawak where a particular State Minister challenge the validity of resignation of the Chief Minister, in which he argued that only through the vote of no-confidence that can show a State Chief Minister cease from office, as such the court on the Perak's MB case, decided that in this situation the fact that the Chief Minister resigned is the extraneous circumstances taken to constitute that the Chief Minister cease to have office.
The application of this case is rebuttable in its application to the case concerning the Perak's MB crisis where the case which was relied on is where the Chief Minister tendered resignation letter but in Perak, there was no resignation letter tendered, as such if the correct interpretation of this case were to be used, it can be deduced that in event where there was no voluntary resignation made, extraneous circumstances cannot be applied, this the act of appointing the new MB is invalid.
On the vote of no confidence, this is the only method available to oust an Executive leader in a parliamentary system, when he refuses to resign when he does not command the support of the majority, this is the position provided by numerous Indian cases that I can't remember their names. So, here, although that BN in Perak may have the majority of assemblymen, they must put foward the motion of no-confidence as this is the only way to constitute a valid sacking of the current Menteri Besar of Perak, only through this manner that the respect upon the rights of the people in Perak is honoured, through the trust that they have placed in their representatives.
But since, the act of the Royal to appoint new MB is where the court bases its support, clearly the decision made transgressing the rights of the people of which this country belongs to. It defeats democracy and allows Royal anarchy in this country that supposed to have been a constitutional monarchy. I never disputed the right of the Royal to select the MB of their own choice but that can only be done after the decision of the people is honored.
I have a few videos that I have taken from the UMNO official website, judging the conduct of Pakatan Rakyat members in response of their protest over the appointment of the new BN's MB. I think their conduct is something so extreme and should have not happened, it is such a regret from them to be selected, but despite their conduct what should prevail is the right of the people.
Please correct or add my supportive authority, I am not at the luxury of time to make extensive research...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vusiidBzjZc&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MyqHgzBh5F4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fB5-vxtzItI&feature=related
No comments:
Post a Comment