Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak has declared that “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” is the overarching philosophy of his government.

However, in less than a month there are enough instances to show that Najib’s slogan of “1Malaysia. People First. Performance Now” is as hollow as the “Cemerlang, Gemilang, Terbilang” slogan of the Abdullah premiership or the “Amanah, Bersih, Cekap” slogan of the Mahathir administration.

The unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak, overthrowing the legal and legitimate Mentri Besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin and foisting on the people of Perak the usurper and illegitimate Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abdul Kadir violates two of the three Najib mottos of “1Malaysia. People First”.

How can there be “1Malaysia” when Najib orchestrated the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak?

How can Najib talk about “People First” when he does not respect the mandate of the people of Perak in the March general election last year in electing a Pakatan Rakyat state government helmed by Nizar as Mentri Besar?

What “People First” is Najib talking about when his unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab is based on the betrayal of the people’s hopes and trust by three “political frogs” who in the past three months dare not even visit their constituencies or show their face publicly. This is “People Last” rather than “People First”!

The least Najib should do if he is not to dishonour his slogan of “People First” is to return the mandate to Perakians – which is why we have consistently called for the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly and the holding of Perak state general elections.

All eyes are now focussed on May 7, when the Perak State Assembly is convened illegally by the usurper Mentri Besar. Many are asking what would happen on May 7, whether there would be chaos or greater infamy in the three-month-old Perak political and constitutional crisis and stalemate, which has produced two Mentris Besar , a renegade State Assembly clerk and the Democracy Tree!

Blatant and flagrant attempts are being made by the usurper Mentri Besar and his excos to clothe the illegal BarisanNasional state government with a veneer of legitimacy.

I advise Zambry not to rewrite history, in particular what happened on February 4, to falsely claim that Nizar had lost majority support of Perak State Assembly members to justify his appointment as the usurper Mentri Besar.

Zambry had misled the judiciary when he asked for Federal Court intervention to interpret whether Perak Sultan Azlan Shah has the right not to accede to Nizar’s request for the dissolution of the Perak assembly, when Nizar “ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the assembly”.

This is the perversion of the truth. The indisputable fact is that Nizar had never, even up to now, “ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the assembly” – and this why the coup d’etat in Perak orchestrated by Najib to topple Nizar as Mentri Besar is unethical, undemocratic, illegal and constitutional and why Nizar continues to be regarded by Perakians and Malaysians as the legitimate Mentri Besar and Zambry the illegitimate and usurper MB.

Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution states: “ If the Menteri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly, then unless at his request His Royal Highness dissolves the Legislative Assembly, he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.”

Article 16(6) never came into play because Nizar never “ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly”, when he sought an audience with the Perak Sultan to dissolve the State Assembly or when Zambry was purportedly appointed as the Mentri Besar.

Let us revisit the pertinent events surrounding the unethical, undemocratic, illegal and unconstitutional power grab in Perak three months ago.

On February 3 night, the Pakatan Rakyat leadership at both the national and Perak state levels decided that the Pakatan Rakyat Perak state government, though commanding a majority in the State Assembly, should seek the dissolution of the Assembly to avoid political instability and uncertainty.

On the morning of February 4, around 8 am, Nizar as Perak Mentri Besar sought an audience with the Perak Sultan to request a dissolution of the Perak Assembly.

The request for an audience with the Sultan for the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly was made by Nizar not because he had lost the confidence of the majority of the Assembly members, as to bring Article 16(6) of the Perak State Constitution into play.

Nizar sought an audience with the Sultan to request the dissolution of the Perak State Assembly while still commanding a majority in the State Assembly to end the political instability and uncertainty – and the question of Nizar losing the post of Mentri Besar if the Sultan rejects the request for dissolution did not arise at all.

However, Nizar was unable to get an audience from the Perak Sultan until some nine hours later at 5 p.m.

In the meantime, Najib, as the Umno Perak Chairman was in the thick of the plot to engineer the defection of three “political frogs” from Pakatan Rakyat, claiming in a media conference in Putrajaya after 5 p.m. the same day that the Barisan Nasional had the support of the majority members of the Perak State Assembly – a claim that was never tested by a no confidence motion against Nizar in the Assembly.

If the Perak Sultan had granted an audience to Nizar in the morning of Feb. 4 and refused his request for dissolution of the State Assembly, it would have been crystal clear that any claim by Najib that the Barisan Nasional had the majority support of the Perak State Assembly members would have to be tested by a no confidence motion against Nizar in the Assembly, and the question of Nizar having vacated the post of Mentri Besar just because he had failed to get the Sultan’s consent for the dissolution of the Assembly would not have arisen.

Was the Perak Sultan privy to information that Najib was engineering the defection of three “political frogs” from the Pakatan Rakyat and was this the reason why Nizar’s request for an audience with the Sultan to seek the dissolution of the State Assembly was stalled for some nine hours from about 8 am to 5 pm?

The answers to these two questions would throw important light on the events of the Perak political and constitutional crisis on Feb. 4 as it has a vital bearing on a cornerstone of our system of constitutional monarchy – the political neutrality of the Rulers.

Be that as it may, it is indisputable that when Nizar sought the consent of the Sultan to dissolve the Perak Assembly, he commanded the support of the majority of the State Assembly members.

In the circumstances, Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution did not apply when the Sultan refused Nizar’s request for dissolution of the Perak Assembly the next day.

Although it may be contended that by Feb. 5, the Barisan Nasional had the “numbers” to claim majority support of the Perak State Assembly with the defection of the three “political frogs” from Pakatan Rakyat, such a claim is challengeable on at least two grounds:

• The acceptance of the letters of resignation of the three “political frogs” by the Speaker, V. Sivakumar; and

• The established constitutional and parliamentary practice that the determination of whether the Mentri Besar has lost the support of the majority members of the Assembly is by way of a motion of no confidence in the Assembly, which was never done. In fact, the Tree Assembly on March 3 reiterated the Assembly’s confidence in Nizar as Perak Mentri Besar.

Zambry has no cause, therefore, to rewrite history of Feb. 4 to claim that Nizar had lost the confidence of the majority of the Assembly members when he asked for the dissolution of the Assembly on Feb. 4 or when the Sultan rejected his request on Feb. 5.

There is no constitutional provision for the Perak Sultan to dismiss the Mentri Besar or to appoint a new Mentri Besar when there has been no resignation from the incumbent Mentri Besar, and this is why Nizar continues as the rightful and legitimate Perak Mentri Besar as there is no dissolution of the Assembly and no motion of no-confidence had been passed against him.

Zambry is only demonstrating that he is a usurper “People Last” and not “1Malaysia” Perak Mentri Besar in insisting on the charade of a May 7 State Assembly meeting, based on the support of three “political frogs” and the illegal convening of the Assembly by a renegade State Assembly clerk!

(Speech at the DAP Public Forum at Hotel Excelsior, Ipoh on Saturday, 2nd May 2009)