“the determination of whether the Mentri Besar has lost the confidence of the majority of the state assembly could only be done by a vote of no confidence in the State Assembly and not by a claim by Najib outside the State Assembly, especially when it is based on dubious and highly disputable grounds.” – YB Kit .

Well a vote of no confidence would prove it what if its not Najib, but Ruler making a determination based on signed signatures of the majority? Would it not be contentious that it cannot be done?

“Excluding the three defectors, there is at most a 28-28 tie between the Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional in the Perak State Assembly” – YB Kit.

This is correct if non recognition of the 3 defectors and decision by the Speaker in the Assembly that letters of resignation are effective overrides the EC decision. However this again is contentious because per what Sani commented above, by convention – and perhaps even the Perak State Constitution (based on RPK’s comment, so I’ve heard) says that the EC’s determination whether there are casual vacancies or not is binding on the House…..

“The Prime Minister-in-waiting, Datuk Seri Najib Razak, who has taken over as Perak UMNO and Barisan Nasional leader, should stop the attempt at the illegal and unconstitutional grab for power in Perak and respect the constitutional process and the mandate of the people of Perak” – YB Kit

Najib’s rebuttal will predictably be : all is fair in love, war & politics : PR head Anwar drew first blood by evincing an attempt last year to do the same (using crossovers) to pass a vote of no confidence on BN Govt in Parliament to take over Putera Jaya before next general election..

computation, you know the answer, don’t you? Many evaluate issues based on hope, not on the logic of the objectiv situation. Thus thus have to come to the river then only to discover there is no bridge!

Any one who faces reality will recognise that for an enterprise and coup de tat of such a bold and dramatic nature – now already splashed all over media as a fiat accompli – there is just no way Najib would not have planned carefully, well in advance, sewing all possible loose ends, and pre-empting and clearing all possible impediments and obstacles, whether legal or human, to reach the objective without a hitch! Come on, get real.

Once he has done this (taking over Perak successfully) there’s no stopping him proceeding next to Kedah and so forth…BN has plenty of resources and it is only Anwar who wanted to challenge it in this defection game that BN has better advantage, As I said before Anwar violated the first rule of engagement of Sun Tzu’s Art of War – fighting in a territory and within parameters more favourable to the opposite side than himself. What Najib has shown in playing this game is to do it stealthily and not alert the opposite side – which may otherwise take counter measures – whereas in the case of Anwar it is all talk and talk and warning the opposite side of what he intended to do with no action!

And then some more Najib can turn around and claim that this defection game is “self defence” because if he does not do it, even though such a game is foul, Anwar will do it, as it repeatedly claim last year.

Anwar has just provided Najib a perfect excuse to that which BN has the advantage. And when Anwar & PR want to condemn Najib/Bn for this tactic, there is no moral cause behind such a condemnation because it is Anwar & PR which first advocated this strategy to procure the fall of federal govt after the 308 General election. Thus the second rule of engagement by Sun Tzu has been violated – losing and forfeiting one’s own moral cause to condemn another’s dirty tactic and losing moral suasion to rally others to fight your cause. One just can’t seek justice/rectification of wrong when one comes to battle with dirty/soiled hands.

As I said before everything is unequal in terms of playing field betwen PR and BN, with everything (whether money or levers of power favouring the incumbent BN) except the one thing – moral capital and righteousness of cause that history has proven could defeat even armies & despots: eg what has Mahatma Gandhi or Nelson Mendela got to fight the overwhelming success if noty moral capital and example that could inspire & galvanise the power of the people to their side?

However if one wants to have a quick fix, and when the referee in the game is not looking, hit the opposite side at the b@lls thinking that that will advance one’s cause faster, what can I say?