“You of all people should know what a stay is meant for. Just to temporarily freeze things.” (SpeakUp)

SpeakUp,
You may be able to understand what a stay order really means but unfortunately our great PhD graduate from Temple University, Dr. Zambry, does not seem to know too much about the meaning of a stay order. How could Dr. Zambry legally assume the duty of the Menteri Besar when there was a high court judgement ruling that the appointment of Zambry as the Menteri Besar had been conducted in an illegimate and unlawful manner since there was a lack of motion of No Confidence against Nizar as Menteri Besar to be duly tabled and passed by majority of the State Legislative Assembly?

If Dr. Zambry has some basic knowledge about the rule of law, then he should leave the MB seat alone and not to sit on it until the Court of Appeal has made an overturn decision in the appeal lawsuit of Nizar Vs. Zambry case.

The Court of Appeal certainly indicates certain degree of bias and prejudice against Pakatan Rakyat lawyers since there are some obvious differences in the work efficiency of the Court of Appeal between serving a Barisan Nasional Lawyer and serving a Pakatan Rakyat lawyer.

More often, we focus our attention about the Perak fiasco only on Najib’s ursurpation motive in the series of lawsuits between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat. However, we tend to ignore the fact that the Sultan of Perak really plays a very important role in the power struggle between Barisan Nasional and Pakatan Rakyat.

Did the Sultan really show that the Monarch had always to stay above partisan politics? If the Sultan really wanted to stay above politics, then why did His Royal Highness want to get himself deeply involved in the game of political power struggle betwen BN and PR? When MB Nizar made a request to the Sultan seeking the royal consent for dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly, why did the Sultan refuse to accede? Perhaps the Sultan was told by Najib that BN already had the command of the majority of the State Legislative Assembly. But why did the Sultan not immediately give instruction to the Assembly Secretary in order to serve out notice for convene of emergency Assembly sitting to all state assemblypersons for purpose of allowing a tabling of the motion of no confidence against V Sivakumar as the Assembly Speaker then proceeding to table another motion of no confidence against Nizar as the MB in the Assembly sitting? Why did the Sultan want to hastily appoint Dr. Zambry as the Menteri Besar when Nizar refused to resign from the post of the MB?

No doubt, the Sultan must believe in his own mind that as the Ruler of the State, His Royal Highness himself possesses the prerogative power to sack the MB. The motive of the Sultan to assert the prerogative power of the monarch in relation to the dismissing of the MB could be the major reason why until todate the Sultan has been and still is reluctant to grant the royal consent for the dissolution of the State Legislative Assembly. It is almost confirmed by most people that the Sultan has the discretionary power to appoint a Menteri Besar and to dissolve the State Legislative Assembly. However, what the Sultan wanted to assert in the Perak fiasco was the power of sacking the Menteri Besar. The core question of the dispute here was whether the Sultan should be given the power to sack a Menteri Besar.

If the Sultan is finally given the inherent power (not clearly stated in the State Constitution) to sack an MB through the adoption of a legal case precedent to be set in the Perak fiasco, then it will create a great impact to the political power structure in the systems of Constitutional Monarchy of Malaysia. An institution of the ruler which is bestowed with the absolute power to appoint and to dismiss a Menteri Besar will mean that the Menteri Besar will always have to succumb to the manipulation and control by the ruler, which is contrary to the current political power structure which requires the ruler to act in accordance with the advice of the Menteri Besar.

If Najib allows the Sultan to possess the inherent power through a legal case precedent to dismiss a Menteri Besar based on the Sultan’s personal liking, then it will be a good proof that Najib is just a useless politician who is willing to give up his Executive Power as the Prime Minister by submitting himself to the manipulation and control of the Monarch. It will really be a redicule if Najib really wants the Court of Appeal to reverse the decision of Kuala Lumpur High Court, which rules that Nizar has been illegimately and unlawfully dismissed by the Sultan because there is lack of a passed motion of no confidence against Nizar on his continual serving as the Menteri Besar by the majority of the State Legislative Assembly.

It is only to the advantage of the power-that-be to uphold the court judgement that the Monarch has never been given the constitutional power to dismiss a Menteri Besar based on the sole discretion of the Monarch unless a motion of no confidence against the incumbent MB has been tabled and passed by the majority of the State Legislative Assembly.