KUALA LUMPUR, March 18 (Bernama) — Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail today stressed that there was no tussle between the Regent of Terengganu and the Regency Advisory Council with the state government pertaining to the appointment of the Menteri Besar of the state.

He said this was because the process of appointing the Menteri Besar for the state was spelled out under Article 14 (2) of the state constitution.

“As such, the candidate appointed as the Menteri Besar is not the nominee of the Regent or the Regency Advisory Council but a person who is appointed according to the laws of the state,” he said in a statement here.

He said the person must be a member of the state legislative assembly who in the opinion of the Regent and Regency Advisory Council commanded majority support in the assembly.

He said the Yang di-Pertuan Agong was fully aware of the provision and that His Majesty cannot interfere in the appointing of the Menteri Besar.

“This is because under Article 34(1) of the Federal Constitution, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong cannot function as a ruler of a state except as the head of the Islamic religion.

“In connection with this, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong does not have his own candidate for the post (Menteri Besar of Terengganu),” stressed Abdul Gani.

He said that His Majesty was aware of the fact that appointing of the Menteri Besar lied fully with the Regent and the Regency Advisory Council, and that His Majesty had no role whatsoever under the law concerning it.

Gani’s explanation comes in the wake of speculation about the position.

Datuk Seri Idris Jusoh whose appointment as the Menteri Besar of Terengganu has been delayed since the 12th general election ended on March 8.

—————————

What is the difference between Karpal’s position (in Perak) and that of the AG (in T’gganu)?

“What should be remembered is that Umno members in Terengganu supporting Datuk Idris Jusoh carried banners which were far more insulting of the sultan. So why the double standard?” a senior DAP official told The Malaysian Insider.

It can be argued that conceptually speaking, it is not so easy to make a case of Malays as having made statements which have a tendency “to raise discontent or disaffection amongst the subjects of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or of the Ruler of any State…” and of having committed a seditious act against the Malay Rulers (read: their Rulers).

After all, there are numerous constitutional provisions pertaining to the Malays and their interest, their customs and religion, which require the prior consent of the Conference of Malay Rulers before they could be amended in any way.

Let’s identify the players before the game is played.

The State Legal Advisor advises the state government. Who advises the Sultan?

“Indeed, Karpal was merely bringing up a point of law, and he was discharging his duty as a lawyer and a member of Parliament. His objection was not directed at the person of the Sultan of Perak.”

Intention irrelevant Sec. 3 sub-sec (3) Sedition Act 1948.

“Someone wrote about it is ok, for malays to say something adverse about the Sultan and not non malays. well. This is political , and racist to the core.” ADAM YONG

I won’t quite put it that way.

Don’t you agree that Sec 3 (c ) and (f) of the Sedition Act do not by definition target the Malays. These provisions are drafted into the Act to prevent non-Malays from questioning the position of Malay Rulers and Malay rights. It is seditious just to raise issues relating to them. Of course, it is all about politics and race.

Would a Malay raising issues involving Article 153 (on which the NEP was grounded), Article 152( national language) and Article 181(Malay Rulers) fall foul of the Sedition Act? Technically speaking, yes. But can you imagine a Malay raising issues pertaining, for example, to the status of the Sultans and the Agong.

“Now, all Malays are Muslims, and Muslims are to sembah to none other than Allah SWT. Did not God created all as equal.”

Surat Al-Hujurat, (verse 13)?

“There is no God but God” are both found in the Koran and the Christian Bible. Remember ‘Allah’ is God in the Arabic language.

So you’d argue that everytime a Muslim gathers his hands, raises them clasped together in the position of the ‘sembah’ when seeking audience with the Sultan or the Agong or members of the Royalty, he or she is committing a sin?

I listened to much of what the lawyer Haris has had to say when giving his talk on the origin of ‘sedition’ in England and how the doctrine developed over hundreds of years, and what it meant to society there today. His attempt to give a historical perspective to our own law on sedition today is nothing more than a history lesson. Do we need a history lesson?

Seditious libel may be a misdemeanor today under English law; or may be “severely circumscribed” in the U.S. by the First Amendment of their Constitution.

But the fact remains that sedition is a serious crime today in Malaysia and that the Sedition Act 1948, in my opinion, is allowed to remain on our books after independence for one purpose and one purpose only i.e. to take issues which brought UMNO into power out of the public forum.

“Btw, muslims do not clasp their palms ( or hands ) together when we pray.” ADAM YONG

Sorry, I assumed so.

But the clasping of the hands gathering them into the position of the ‘sembah’ when you meet the Sultan or when seeking the audience of the Agong to speak, if you are a Malay and a Muslim, would be what some call ‘menduakan Tuhan’ – a sin in the eyes of God.

“Meanwhile, we look forward to the learned AG to take Karpal out of circulation.”

I believe Karpal’s chances of spending two years at His Majesty’s pleasure and hospitality are about as equal to those of RPK.

“However, neither DYMM Sultan of Perak or The Raja Muda of Perak or the Regent of Kelantan, made any ‘fuss’ over YB Karpal Singh remarks.” ADAM

I believe the statement by the Sultan of Perak saved Karpal’s skin.

ADAM,

I suppose it depends on how you raise the issues relating to Art. 160(2) Federal Constitution 1957. Art. 160 (2) itself is not among the Articles referred to by the Sedition Act.

What locus standi are you talking about, Adam Yong?

I did not say that.

Gotta go to Church. Talk to you later.

“The Royalty will not lose their powers if they stand on the right side, behind the Rakyat” dawsheng

The rakyat you refer to here is not a homogenous whole or entity or race like the Japanese are. The Japanese, for example, are a homogenous race with a history that goes back 1,000 years. Today they stand solidly behind, and are fiercely loyal to their Emperor in a way no other race could hope to do.

Ours is a constitutional monarchy. Not just any monarchy but a Malay monarchy in a multiracial society.

There are forces at work who would like to change the course that history has taken.

I must admit though that part of my argument came from knowing the man.

“In no way did TDM seek to define the powers of Royalty, but it was with the express purpose of usurping those powers of the Royalty unto himself.” Tickler

Express purpose? Did he say he was usurping those powers for himself? I preferred the use of more diplomatic language like “defining the powers of the monarch” to describe what happened. But yes, he certainly did not set out to “define the powers”. I believe the so-called constitutional crisis was ignited by a ruler or rulers who stepped out of their constitutional role not by choice or design but by default, and that Mahathir used the occasion to “define their powers under the constitution” to his advantage.

“It has not in any way strengthened the monarchy other than making them subservient to UMNO.”

Strengthened or weakened the monarchy would depend on one’s perspective. Certainly he did not set out to strengthen it.

UMNO especially UMNO of the 50s, 60s and 70s needed the monarchy to unite the Malays who have a feudalist mindset, and the monarchy saw UMNO as a way to maintain its legitimacy as an institution. I think that is a fair assessment.

Events of the mid 80s and 90s and more recently have driven a wedge between the two as the Malays are divided. But when the two unite under a new leadership, the scenario will not be one between UMNO vis-à-vis the monarchy.

“To strengthen the monarchy, would have been to the detriment of UMNO.” Tickler

Zero sum game between UMNO and the Royals? To say so would be to ignore 50 years of history.

“I guess age has mellowed the man and what more, a father at 50!” JONG

Remember! Man is like wine. I don’t pretend to know what a woman is like and I’ll not say it here for fear of incurring the wrath of her royal highness!

“Has Karpal Singh done anything wrong? No. Quite plainly he has not.” taikong

Imagine what it could mean to you and me if he is a judge, jury and prosecutor all at the same time.

“…perhaps he has lost the plot. ”

Not if he is the plot.

“Karpal Singh should have sought an audience with the Sultan of Perak to allay the accusations of sedition against him” Anwar said.

But then to seek the audience of the Sultan presumably to apologize – as opposed to clarifying and explaining – if indeed he had uttered those seditious remarks, would that not weaken his case? One does not seek the audience of the Sultan just to explain.

A catch-22 situation here, don’t you think?

“In this country, the constitutional monarchy is an institution to be respected and we have to mind the Rulers’ position and sovereignty,” Anwar added.

Would seeking what appears to be a royal pardon stop the AG from later prosecuting him?

“I still believe citizen Karpal Singh deserves a right to be heard his understanding of the law, as he sees it. Let him argue it out..” JONG

They are determined to give him the opportunity. It will not be in the court of public opinion though.

He will have to do that in court and in front of a judge who is likely to be prosecution oriented as all trial judges are. It will then go on appeal and is likely to be reversed by court of appeal judges who are more neutral. Hopefully it will not go to the federal court likely to be headed then by the country’s number one skirt chaser aka sugar daddy.

Since he cannot hope to be sugar daddy to Karpal, my prediction is that Karpal may well end up enjoying His Majesty’s hospitality for two years!