Forum – “Perak Coup D’etat: What Say You?”

Public Forum : “Perak Coup D’etat : What Say You?”
Date : 17th Feb 2009 (Tuesday)
Time : 8:00pm
Venue : Dewan Hamzah, Majlis Perbandaran Klang, Klang
Speakers : Ngeh Koo Ham
A. Sivanesan
Lim Kit Siang
Khalid Samad
Dr. Dzulkifli Ahmad
Haris Ibrahim
Charles Santiago
Organiser: Office of Klang Member of Parliament

Please contact Yap (016-2026300) / Sarah (016-6267797) for any enquiries.

  1. #1 by chengho on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 6:33 pm

    Keep on riding on sentiment and politic ,what about economic agenda?

  2. #2 by alberttye on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 7:07 pm

    This is not politicing. This is about social and political justice, which will lay the foundation of economical well-being.

  3. #3 by limkamput on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 9:30 pm

    chengho@ not the admiral from China,
    Talk is cheap, what economic agenda are you complaining about? First, economic agenda must come from the political party that controls the government. Second, the political party that controls the government must be to formulate and implement the right economic agenda for the rakyat. If we have a wrong government, then certainly we shall have wrong economic agenda. I really hope you know what economic agenda is. Let me ask you a few questions: 1. Is giving freehold titles to Chinese new villagers a right economic agenda? 2. Is unreasonable and unnecessary toll collection a right economic agenda? 3. Is layers and layers of bureaucracy a right economic agenda in term of promoting business vibrancy? 4. Is rampant corruption a right economic agenda? 5. Is putting incompetent people in important positions a right economic agenda? 6. Is wasteful government spending a right economic agenda?
    Politics is paramount. The economic agenda of the government is decided by the political party that controls it. Obviously you do not even know how to criticise a political party that you dislike.

  4. #4 by Loh on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 10:01 pm

    The Legislative Assembly had not voted on the MB’s level of support, so it was not yet time for the Sultan to consider dissolving the LA, much less for him to ask MB Nizar to resign on 5th Feb. The fact that Najib told the Sultan that he had as many BN members as PK at 28 each, with three independent ADUNs said to support BN could not be the basis of the Sultan’s action, based on the constitution.

    It would be reasonable for the Sultan to approve of BN plus three to form the state government if that happened immediately after the general election. But the three ADUNs called themselves independent after having submitted their letters of resignation to the speaker of the LA. The Speaker had requested the Election Commission to conduct by-election on two vacancies, but the Election Commission acted beyond its authority in declaring that the vacancies did not exist. Unless the issue is decided in court, the status of the two independent PKR ADUNs was doubtful. The turncoat from DAP too submitted her resignation, and the information should be available with the Sultan.

    The Sultan decided that the two PKR turncoats retained their seats despite the dispute. That was done out of the status of his office rather than on solid legal basis.

    The Sultan was no doubt aware that the two PKR turncoats were arrested for corruption charges. They are innocent until proven guilty, and if that eventuate, they would have to leave their posts. If the Sultan believed that the ACA were right that corruption take place and that the court would eventually find the accused guilty if they indeed perpetrated in corrupt practice, then it would be a matter of time that by-election would be held. If the two PKR turncoats were innocent but were framed up so that they could be blackmailed into crossing over to BN, then as the Ruler who is above politics, he should not have facilitated political blackmail. Under the circumstances, the Sultan should opt to dissolve the Legislative assembly so that the three troublesome ADUNs would not return. Mentri Besar Nizar presented the opportunity for the benefit of Perak, without crisis.

    The Sultan chose to dismisse MB Nizar when he did not submit to subservient obedience. Mentri Besar cannot be dismissed because the Sultan could not invoke article 16 (6) in conjunction with 16 (7) when the Legislative Assembly had not passed a vote of no confidence on the MB. The interview the Sultan had with the BN members and their friends could not replace a formal meeting of the LA. So the Sultan erred in declaring the post of MB vacant.

    The Sultan made another mistake in appointing and swearing in Zambry as the Mentri Besar, when Nizar is still the incumbent MB.

    The Sultan made the third mistake in swearing in the executive councilors to Zambry’s government which is in dispute.

    The action of the Sultan would be unconventional in constitutional monarchy. He had acted as though he is above the state constitution of Perak. He had officially ended the status of the Perak state government. That was coup d’etat, with full concurrence of BN government supported by UMNO youth celebrating on the streets, and harassing those who believe in rule of law, and who believe that that constitutional monarch should act in accordance with the constitution in conducting official duties.

    There has been dispute on whether the Sultan can be sued. The issue now is whether the action by the Sultan can be reviewed by court. Since the courts are the place to decide whether actions taken by the parties concerned follow the spirit and letter of the constitution, it is the court that should decide when disputes arise. Again UMNO Youth had sent their warriors onto the streets to threaten anybody who claims basic rights under the constitution. Are they from gangster-like organization?

  5. #5 by OrangRojak on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 10:23 pm

    Are you going to webcast this one?

  6. #6 by fongmrs on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 10:29 pm

    Is it possible for all the future DAP forums to be broadcasted live please, and subsequently put on youtube?
    thank you =)

  7. #7 by One4All4One on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 11:36 pm

    Simply put, the sultan of Perak, with due respect to him, despite his legal reputation and experience, should not have jumped the gun.

    Yes, he has royal prerogatives. Yes, he is being held in awe.
    Yes, he is well respected by certain quarters. Yes, he is the head of a state.

    However, in a constitutional monarchy, the constitution is the supreme foundation on which the monarchy is based. Not the other way round. Hence the monarchy is also bound by rules and regulations, which is the constitution.

    There is nothing such as an absolute monarchy in Malaysia. Therefore, a monarch is also subjected to the laws which govern all the people of the land.

    No doubt a monarch enjoys certain privileges which the ordinary folks do not. But, a wise head of state would not and should not resort to flaunting and act beyond that privilege.

    Just as there is no absolute monarchy, there should not be any restriction on “his subjects” to disagree or even to make known their views in an open and fair manner. Any such undertakings should not be construed as “treason” or “disloyalty”.

    The royalty should, on the other hand, be sensitive to the grouses on the ground. Properly advised, a royalty would be able to gather, without haste, all necessary facts and information before deciding on the most appropriate course of action.

    In the eyes of the public, the monarchy seems to have jumped the gun.

  8. #8 by wanderer on Sunday, 15 February 2009 - 11:37 pm


    Why waste your precious time to educate a dickhead.
    Obviously, chenho is too honorable a name for a stray d#g to have.

  9. #9 by P.O.T.S on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 1:19 am

    I say, Nizar Jamaluddin for Prime Minister of Malaysia!

    If one observes how Ir. Nizar presents his toughts in speeches and ceramah, one can sense that the man truly knows and believes in what he is speaking.

    In the Ceramah 5 MB on PAStv, he spoke for 40 minutes without a script and with little hesitance.

    We need leaders who are sincere and humble and knowledgeable at the same time.

    How many can you find in Malaysia?

  10. #10 by anna brella on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 1:53 am

    Isn’t it strange that a very learned and highly regarded past Lord President of the Supreme Court would make, what looks to many like….er….obvious errors of judgement on legal/constitutional matters.

    And isn’t this (imo, less dangerous version of a) coup d’etat situation somewhat similar to that extremely dangerous version we all saw happening in 1988, and which sadly led to that shameful removal (through alleged collusion) of the then Lord President of the Supreme Court, Tun Salleh Abas, and which crisis then led to (allegedly some would say, very conveniently for the Executive Government) the loss of Malaysia’s judicial independence/her separation of powers which is provided for in her Constitution to enable the process of judicial review which is an important protection for the people against potential abuses of delegated governing power.

    Interesting. Who knows, perhaps that now-dormant judicial review process may even be resurrected soon and so commence to proceed to sweep away the messy cobwebs that are now clearly evident from this good learning opportunity accorded, courtesy of HRH the learned Sultan of Perak, to all, including constitutional law rookies everywhere, somewhat akin to what the good Lord Denning used to when he was around to make the law student’s life that much more interesting!

    “Imagine Power To The People” John Lennon.

  11. #11 by taiking on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 9:26 am

    3 decades ago umno made the mistake of switching the medium of instruction in school from english to malay. We are still suffering the consequences of that mistake today. Our graduates became unemployable and they lack the language skill (ie in english) to improve their knowledge.

    2 decades ago umno made the mistake of messing with the judiciary. Today the impact of that mistake has snowballed to a ridiculous scale and extent.

    On its own, each of these two mistake, is already grave enough for any country and cumulatively the two are simply disastrous for all malaysians.

    Today, umno again make the mistake of applying its infamous culture of money politics to grab power illegally in perak. This is one mistake too many. The rest of us certainly do not want to see the nation suffering for the next 20-30 years from this mistake.

    In the last 30 years, S.Korea, Taiwan and Singapore overtook us. In the next30 years, Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia will overtake us. Zimbabwe may be catching up on us by then.

    Say no to all these. So no to umno. No to umnoputras. No to bn.

  12. #12 by yhsiew on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 9:45 am

    The Perak coup D’etat has done great damage to Najis integrity, moral standing and self-respect even before he ascends the Prime Minister’s throne. From the Perak episode, the rakyat can clearly see what kind of person Najis is – sly, cunning, dishonest, power hungry etc.

    If a school headmaster could refrain from going to nightclubs in order to protect his self-respect and moral standing, a designated Prime Minister should do even more to protect his by dissociating himself from activities which the rakyat perceive as dishonest, fraudulent, deceitful, corrupt and illegal.

  13. #13 by OrangRojak on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 9:57 am

    “What Say You?”
    Is LKS playing ‘spot the Hollywood reference’? Nice choice. This is uttered after “Fight for us and regain your honour” in a recent blockbuster. Very appropriate for what’s just happened in Perak. I’m looking forward to The Return of the MB.

    Can we have an article that ends “Hoist the Colours!” later?

  14. #14 by k1980 on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 10:01 am

    If there were to be a GE in 2009, umno will be buried/cremated

    The Malaysian Employers Federation believes that as many as 200,000 workers could be jobless in 2009 – the result of manufacturing plants shutting down operations or reducing their workforce in the face of limp demand.

  15. #15 by Loh on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 1:27 pm

    UMNO youth has been organizing protests against Karpal Singh for suggesting that the Sultan of Perak should be sued, which is equivalent to presenting the decision of the Sultan in connection with the Perak change of government for court decision. UMNO youth accused Karpal of being disloyal to the King, but they did not realize that UMNO youth was only loyal to UMNO but not the King.

    The action by the government which could be considered as insulting to the monarchy was the constitutional amendment which allows bills to become law without royal assent. What was more damaging to the prestige of the royal houses was that the rulers were denied immunity from prosecution for personal conduct, and they might lose their official position as rulers if convicted of offence of some specified gravity. UMNO youth did not protest against the person who initiated these all, TDM. But UMNO apologists declared that those amendments to the constitution strengthen the role of the rulers as constitutional monarchy. One would find it difficult to understand why a provision for the removal of rulers can be considered as strengthening their position. A simple question put to the rulers would clarify the matter. The question would be would the rulers prefer to have that provision included in the constitution of a special court for their trial, and the provision for their removal under certain circumstances. The question was never asked. Perhaps UMNO youth should pressure its parent body to ask the above question, as a way to prove that they are loyal to the Sultan rather than to UMNO president.

    It would be more accurate to claim that the action if taken by Karpal to have the decision of the Peak Sultan confirmed or denied by the court would strengthen the role of the rulers as constitutional monarchy. It is because the tenure of the Sultan is not absolute due to the constitutional provision that the public do wonder whether the Sultan had taken his decision based on his free will. A confirmation by the court would dispel all doubts the public might have on the Sultan. It is trite to claim that perception could affect the confidence of the citizens towards their King. This is especially so when there is proper institution to serve to confirm the decision of the Sultan, but that channel is denied. In the event that the decision of the Sultan is overturned by court, then it confirms that the government could not make use of the constitutional amendments made in 1993 to influence the action of the Sultan. Had UMNO tried to exert undue influence it would then show that the constitution triumph supreme. So the constitutional monarch is strengthened because the decision of the Sultan can be civilly confirmed by court. However, if the court confirms the Sultan’s decision, they would provide justifications.

    UMNO youth comprises leaders who have been educated here and abroad, and the simple logic above cannot fail them. If they are keen to respect the prestige of royalty, they should pressure the UMNO president in returning immunity to the royal houses. As constitutional monarch, the rulers accept that their decisions may be presented for court ruling. They needed no protection from UMNO youth.

  16. #16 by distantmalay on Monday, 16 February 2009 - 8:51 pm

    hello….right is might.

    royal prerogative is not above everything,
    it is not above kebenaran…

You must be logged in to post a comment.