Anwar, Karpal, Sivarasa and Azmin to be suspended from Parliament for 6 months

From @limkitsiang:

Pandemonium Parliament w sudden new motion 2suspend Karpal Sivarasa Azmin as MPs 4six mths against Standing Orders/ rules of natural justice

If BN w simple parl majority can abuse its powers violating all rules n principles, what it cld not do when it gets back 2/3 majority?

Speaker Pandikar fails 2explain what is “public interest” he exempts rule Minister’s motion need 7days notice 2suspend Karpal Sivarasa Azmin

Parlment being dragged out over surprise motion agnst standing orders 2suspend another 3PR MPs 4six mths – unprecedented in Msian Parliament

What happened in Parl proves Acton’s aphorism corruption of power – strongest reason Y BN shld not get back 2/3 P majority n must b replaced

Motion 2suspend MPs Karpal Sivarasa Azmin 4six mths – 3 not told of charges or referred 2Cttee of Privileges. Travesty of justice n Parlmnt

Earlier in prolonged pandemonium/altercation Sivarasa Azmin were suspended by Speaker Pandikar. Most disgraceful day in Msian Parl history

Pakatan accuses BN of brute force MP suspensions

By Clara Chooi (The Malaysian Insider)
December 15, 2010

KUALA LUMPUR, Dec 15 — Pakatan Rakyat (PR) lawmakers cried foul today over the impending suspensions of four of its MPs, accusing Barisan Nasional (BN) of attempting to strengthen its parliamentary power through brute majority.

The opposition MPs said they were “shocked” when they saw the inclusion of a motion notice in today’s Order Paper, calling for the six-month suspension of three MPs — Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor), Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak) and R. Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) — from the House over the Israel-APCO issue.

The three will join Opposition Leader Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, who is also facing the boot from the House for six months for claiming earlier this year that public relations consultancy APCO Worldwide had been behind both the 1 Malaysia and One Israel concepts.

Yesterday, Anwar was the only MP recommended for punishment over the issue in the final report by the House’s Rights and Privileges Committee.

Karpal, who is also a committee member, was recommended to receive severe “admonishment” for allegedly insulting Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia, the committee’s chairman.

“You witnessed the drama in Parliament just now. Yesterday, when we were in discussion with Karpal, we only received confirmation that he would be admonished.

“But today, we were shocked to see these new recommendations of suspensions. This means, everyday, things change. The facts may be the same as before but today, they want to suspend three others for six months,” Anwar told a press conference in Parliament.

He accused the ruling coalition of using brute majority to bulldoze through their decisions and strengthen their power in Parliament.

“This is why we would like to record our disappointment here and our strong rejection on the Speaker’s agreement to allow this to happen.

“We are aware of the arrogance of Umno-BN but to use the Speaker’s chair as their channel, this is wrong,” he said.

The motion against Karpal, Sivarasa and Azmin by a Minister in the Prime Minister’s department today states that the three had violated Standing Order 85.

The regulation stipulates that any statement recorded before the House’s powerful Rights and Privileges Committee must be embargoed until its final report is tabled before Parliament.

“On December 6, the Gombak MP, through an emergency motion under Standing Order 18(1) had touched on the statements and a letter that was furnished to the committee on December 3.

“The MPs from Bukit Gelugor and Subang had also insulted and violated the rights and privileges of an MP. It is an insult to the House,” it was said on the Order Paper.

The additional suspension orders on the Karpal, Azmin and Sivarasa sparked off further furore within the opposition bench in the House, and dominated much of this morning’s session.

Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia did not have the opportunity to open the floor for debates on the second reading of the amendments to the Road Transport Act 1987 which was scheduled for today.


Suspensions will give BN two-thirds majority
Dec 15, 10 2:46pm (Malaysiakini)

Pakatan Rakyat claim that the expected suspension of four of its MPs tomorrow will lead to BN regaining its two-thirds majority in Parliament.

Rasah MP Anthony Loke (seated left) said that the implications of this are huge and the consequences dire for Pakatan.

“Maybe this opportunity will be used by BN to amend the Federal Constitution or re-draw the electoral boundaries,” he told reporters at the Parliament lobby today.

A motion to suspend Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim for six-months was tabled yesterday in a bid to censure him for claiming that Apco Worldwide – a public relations firm that advises the Najib administration – was linked to the Zionist regime.

Following this, he was referred to the Rights and Privileges Committee which recommended for Anwar’s suspension despite not hearing his defence.

Following public criticism of the committee’s investigation by three Pakatan MPs – Azmin Ali (PKR-Gombak), R Sivarasa (PKR-Subang) and Karpal Singh (DAP-Bukit Gelugor) – they were alleged to have broke an embargo on the committee’s report and a motion will be tabled today to suspend them for six months as well.

Loke said that Dewan Rakyat Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia had “allowed the federal government to use their majority as they like”.

“Tomorrow they will pass a motion to suspend Anwar and now three more MPs from Pakatan. I see a hidden agenda here.

“This will give a huge political implication to Pakatan in the Parliament because now there are 77 MPs and if four are suspended that means over the next six months, we will lose our one-thirds number in the House. We will only have 73 in MPs,” he said.

[More to follow]

  1. #1 by Dipoh Bous on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 4:28 pm

    …it would really be very entertaining to watch if the session (in parliament) is televised live !

    …I m sure that would attract the most number of viewers.. LOL

  2. #2 by Jeffrey on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 4:34 pm

    ///Rasah MP Anthony Loke said that the implications of this are huge and the consequences dire for Pakatan. “Maybe this opportunity will be used by BN to amend the Federal Constitution or re-draw the electoral boundaries”///

    That’s one thing.

    The other is that if the PM dissolves Parliament and calls for an election within the 6 months period of suspension can Anwar, Karpal & Sivarasa (under our parlaimentary rules) stand for election or be elected to Parliament during this period of suspension?

    I don’t know why Anwar bring up this issue of Apco Worldwide being linked to the Zionist regime, and 1 Malaysia to 1 Israel in the first place that only serves to provide the opportunity and excuse for the other side to come down hard on PR’s leaders, with all the hidden agendas. That is a nonsensical issue that only served more to embarrass him and require him to subsequently explain and do damage control to his friends, patrons and American supporters abroad.

  3. #3 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 5:02 pm

    Not all the expletives in the world could put this Parliament together again!

    Pandikar or is it penderhakar?

  4. #4 by undertaker888 on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 5:24 pm

    crooks using all kinds of crooked hooks to win.
    they are in power yet need 30% headstart to win. ptuiii!

  5. #5 by Loh on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 6:41 pm

    That is a peaceful way to get back the 2-3rd majority in parliament, compared to May 13. When one has ugly reputation, adding more ugly incidents only makes others less weighty, it might even help to divert attention.

    If the parliament amends the constitution during the remaining period PR should have them reversed. Bad deeds have bad recompenses; there might be BN vacancies in parliament before BN could cheat further. Let’s hope for that.

  6. #6 by tunglang on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 6:49 pm

    BN. Time, and time again you reassure us Rakyat you will change for the better. Where is the change?
    Still the same old 1-Thick Face Black Heart.

  7. #7 by drngsc on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 8:33 pm

    Yes, we must change this BN government, if not for any other reasons than just to show BN that they can be changed. Even if you do not wish for the alternative to BN, to become government, just change the government, to show BN that they can be changed and that they must listen to the people, not just their cronies.

  8. #8 by Taxidriver on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 9:18 pm

    Bro Lim. what Malaysian parliament are you talking about. For all we know there was never a Malaysian parliament since the time of mamak kutty who destroyed UMNO, formed his own party-UMNO Baru- and turned the Dewan Rakyat into UMNOB Sendirian Berhad.

    Every Malaysian of every race must stand up to save our nation from the present corrupt and lawless leaders. Do it at the 13th GE for the future generation of Malaysians.

    Hidup Rakyat! Tumbangkan UMNOB/BN Demi Masa Depan Yang Lebih Cerah.

  9. #9 by ReformMalaysia on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 10:35 pm

    First , we have School bullies
    then we have road bullies

    and now…… Parliament bullies?

  10. #10 by boh-liao on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 10:42 pm

    Ha, ha, once again UmnoB/BN outsmart, outfox PR
    Never underestimate UmnoB/BN, d no principle lot who will do anything 2 stay in power n 2 cull PR

  11. #11 by waterfrontcoolie on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 10:58 pm

    They WILL anything to cling to the very Power to bend anything they like! And I believe this is only the begining, PR members must realize now that they should NOT STOOP to engage them; let them shoot themselvesin their feet. Remember, after all these years, the so-called apolitical Malaysians are no longer naive, they hate to have leaders taking them for fools! I only hope PR members actually bring dignity to the august house to tell the voters, they are different!!! Many of us have already concluded how they would behave! sign of desperadoes doing their last circuit!

  12. #12 by Jong on Wednesday, 15 December 2010 - 11:46 pm

    Anwar again, all because of him, how dumb can he be!! – political savvy?

  13. #13 by sheriff singh on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 1:56 am

    It would appear that our institutions are being run by kangaroos.

  14. #14 by monsterball on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 2:55 am

    Nothing surprising.
    And looks like Lim Kit Siang’s voice can only be heard in Parliament.
    He has one that before and will do it again magnificently.
    Let then take advantage and with their false 2/3 majority…doing exactly like Perak.
    Malaysians are keeping quiet patiently waiting for 13th GE.

  15. #15 by Taxidriver on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 3:43 am

    Tahun 1987-Operation Lallang
    Tahun 2010-Operation Halang

    And it is obvious this incompetent, shameless and power-crazy UMNOB government can only be toppled by PEOPLE POWER.

  16. #16 by k1980 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 7:35 am

    Are the 2 “independent” MPs from SAPP going to side with bn or PR regarding the 2/3 majority issue?

  17. #17 by k1980 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 8:48 am

    ICC should go after those self-described “moderates” who perpetuate violence here

  18. #18 by k1980 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 8:51 am

    Ohbama should follow Malaysia and suspend opposition Republicans from Congress and the Senate so that his bills can be passed. Then he would be impeached like Nixon before him.

  19. #19 by yhsiew on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 9:23 am

    The country is drifting towards a rogue state and goes the way of Zimbabwe.

  20. #20 by Bigjoe on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 9:23 am

    If BN gets 2/3 majority, the lines at foreign embassy and consulates will be a mile long and it won’t be just non-Malays Brrr….

  21. #21 by Thor on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 9:31 am

    We’ve seen it over and over again and what can we do?
    We knew all the way that this country is totally controlled by Umno.
    If you people who represented us in parliament are becoming “victim” of those BN bullies, then what are we?
    We’re no god nor can we fight with arms.
    We give you our votes and you cannot even fight for yourselves so how are our next generation gonna survive here?
    By the look at the present scenario, I’ve got to plan something next, in case you people lose in the next GE.
    I’m “pulling” my son out of TAR college and I’m asking him to join the Singapore force.
    Once my son gets a PR, I’ll move my family out.
    At least, I won’t be treated as a “pendatang” there.
    So! to PR fellas, you better buck up and put your brain to full use.
    Don’t complain or sulk ‘cos that won’t help you or us.
    Do your part and fight for the cause ‘cos the next GE could be the end for UmnoBN or us.
    Do or Die!!!

  22. #22 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 10:32 am

    The BN took the action (against Anwar) and wanted their pound of flesh because they were very unhappy with Anwar raising this issue of Apco Worldwide being linked to the Zionist regime, and 1 Malaysia to 1 Israel.

    The BN justified the disciplinary action and suspension on grounds that there was no truth in what Anwar said. It is questionable whether Anwar himself was interested in and had checked thoroughly the truth of what he said. When politicians here accuse each other the primary goal of the accusations and counter accusations is — with some exceptions — seldom to uphold or expose the truth when the issue of the day touches on race and religion. Rather, in the case of Anwar versus UMNO on the Apco 1 Malaysia/ 1 Israel issue, it is their goal to each position themselves as champion of the Malay/Muslim audience.

    That the leader of our Opposition front espousing inclusiveness should choose a religiously nuanced issue like Apco 1 Malaysia/ 1 Israel connection to undermine the ruling party is grounded on the tit-for-tat justification that the opposite side is doing no less the same thing.

    The latest according to TheMalaysianInsider report Dec 15 : in a forum promoted by Utusan Malaysia, Fed Govt’s main religious think tank Ikim slam says that not all religions are equal and Umno-linked scholars attacked Anwar for promoting religious pluralism in his advocacy of Ketuanan Rakyat and rejection of Ketuanan Melayu. How could this position put forth by participants of the forum be consistent or reconcilable with the PM’s platform of “1 Malaysia”??? And yet in spite of what the PM advocated to the international stage – the call for a “Global Movement of the Moderates” to counterbalance the negative effects of extremism”, in our own backyard no one as yet from the Ruling Coalition would count to “speak up” (as Aliran’s P Ramakrishnan urged in earlier thread) to stand up to contradict or repudiate this position.

    What is noteworthy is that when the leader of opposition himself earlier played the religiously nuanced card of linking Apco to Jews and 1 Malaysia to 1 Israel, also nobody from civil society/opposition side that stood up to repudiate and contradict what Anwar said!

    It must not be forgotten that Anwar himself (whilst he was part of UMNO and then supportive of TDM, was instrumental in a major way in advancing TDM’s aggressive Islamisation of this country over 22 years that has strengthened and expanded the Religious Establishment here).

  23. #23 by Jeffrey on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 10:38 am

    Today the Religious Establishment purportedly in support of the ruling party turns against Anwar (even if he played their card in the Apco-Jews and 1 Malaysia-1 Israel issue). Conceivably if the ruling party itself evinces a sincere effort to promote pluralism (ala 1 Malaysia way) and deviate from the agenda of the Religious Establishment to promote religion, the powerful Religious Establishment will also turn against it.

    Which is why no one from ruling coalition is expected to dare openly and vehemently repudiate the position put forth in the Utusan Malaysia’s forum.

    The interesting question is whether Anwar himself, now that he is attacked, will dare openly and frontally repudiate and challenge the Religious Establishment/IKIM’s position – that “that not all religions are equal”!

    If not, it implies that the Religious Establishment is strong and powerful enough to assert its own agenda and to make its indelible stamp/mark on political and national policies.

    That both the ruling UMNO side and equally the Opposition side in Anwar himself and other times PAS’s politicians are complicit to and play to their tune is perhaps what makes Singapore’s officials gossip that incompetent leaders facilitate the country’s dangerous decline.

    I assume the word “decline” is referenced to rise and hegemony of racial bigotry/religious extremism inimical to unity of multiracial communities and economic progress in tandem with Globalisation.

    Today our politicians are playing games with parliamentary suspension when the whole issue stems from the larger problem of both sides playing religious politics for political objectives in the guise of being “politically savvy” – and not really caring for the immutable Principles of Fairness, Moderation, Balance and the Truth – that is accelerating the decline.

    The party that gains is in long run neither the ruling or opposition politicians. It is a powerful “Third Force” which is not the one that RPK or Haris Ibrahim are referring to.

  24. #24 by HJ Angus on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 10:51 am

    Is the 2/3 ratio created when MPs are suspended?
    Mathematically I don’t think so as the only result is that MPs cannot be present to vote and their seats are just “vacant”.
    Unless the rule in Parliament says that 2/3 of those present vote for a bill to change the Constitution.
    To me this Speaker has not been a good guardian of our democracy but more a BN stooge.

  25. #25 by Cinapek on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 11:34 am

    PR should not complain about BN regaining a two third majority with this suspension. PR shot themselves in the foot. They should realise that with the impending GE being called there is nothing BN would do to derail and disrupt PR to win the election and win big. All is fair in war. And if experienced politicians in PR fail to see this then they have only themselves to blame for being baited and maneuvered into traps set by BN. PR should have spotted the insidious pattern of entrapments by now since they are not novices in politics.

    PR may criticize and condemn the foreign consultants such as APCO but these are the very organizations providing strategic advice to the BN Govt right now and whether you like it or not, they are good at their jobs. Previous administration had used similar consultants in their successful fight against Semangat ’46. It is not any different now. PR must not allow BN to seize the initiative if it harbours any hope to doing well in the next GE. It is time to stop complaining, huddle down and plan how to go on the offensive. The best defence is a good offence. PR must put BN on the defensive and back peddling in the runup to the next GE.

  26. #26 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 2:11 pm

    Hello Pandikar,

    Apa susah, susah – Might as well suspend all opposition MPs. Then UMNO will have a unanimous support from Parliament & u can go change all the laws u want.

    Maybe, whilst u r at it, u may want to also pass a law to ban the world from discussing Altantuya too. Why not? Malaysian parliament Boleh.

  27. #27 by perampok cinta1 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 3:45 pm

    First of all, the suspended MPs were asking for it. I’ve seen too many crap from Pakatan’s MP of which I considered as childish and provocative.
    How many times have we seen Pakatan’s MPs create chaos in the parliament, just to be seen as ‘heroes for the rakyat’?
    I doubt BN will use the 2/3 majority after the suspension of the MPs. BN is not PR, they won’t use that kind of tactics. Only Pakatan would take uncivilized measures just to be in power.

  28. #28 by Dipoh Bous on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 3:48 pm

    Perhaps we all should ‘accept’ the fact that BN is very good in ‘administering’ our country. PR just can’t ‘govern’ this country……(that’s what I understand from RPK’s article as qouted by the msm).

    So, let us just sit back and enjoy the coming festive season.

    Merry christmas and (minus the ‘very’) happy new year to all malaysians…

  29. #29 by tak tahan on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 4:42 pm

    First of all, the suspended MPs were asking for it. I’ve seen too many crap from Pakatan’s MP of which I considered as childish and provocative. by perampok cinta 1

    Another cinta my ass farter.The real issue here is the lawless parliment and kangaroo court conditions that cause all this uproar not only from PR’s MP but also from any decent citizens.Incompetent ruling goverment is exactly what wikileak exposed.May wikileak release more on those incompetent,corrupted bigots/racists to leak in their pants.Then PR’s MP will not raise their voices but just gigle queitly in parliment.Satisfied?

  30. #30 by dagen on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 4:47 pm

    There is a word for people like them.
    “Dickheads” – blardy dickheads.

  31. #31 by loveandgratitude on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 5:27 pm


    SHAME on the Speaker

  32. #32 by ENDANGERED HORNBILL on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 6:07 pm

    When Parliamentary Speaker doesn’t go by rulebook, then Parliament also seen not going by rule of law.

    If no rule of law, then rule of jungle takes over.

    There u have it: malaysian rule of jungle in Parliament.

    Let’s coin a new term: rainforest Parliament.

  33. #33 by boh-liao on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 6:29 pm

    In M’sia, democracy n justice r practised UmnoB/BN style
    Once UmnoB/BN in majority, even a simple majority, they control everything
    They r d prosecutor, jury n judge (follow rules or not, irrelevant)
    PR should hv known dis by now, rather than get whacked by UmnoB/BN all d time

  34. #34 by undertaker888 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 6:34 pm

    how i wish a bolt of lightning from heaven strikes poondekar and the umno hooligans to oblivion. my hate for them has increased another level.

  35. #35 by undertaker888 on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 6:43 pm

    Malaysia, Truly A-Sial.
    The land where university students are not mature enough to be involved in politics but 14 years old or less are matured enough to be married off to paedophiles. Truly A-sial.

  36. #36 by monsterball on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 10:24 pm

    Kangaroo court we know there is.
    Kangaroo Parliament is the new addition.
    Unbelievably….an issue brought up by Anwar for a debate…gunned down….suspend him…giving Anwar no opportunity to defend himself.
    Sivarasa and Azmin were trying hard to convince the Speaker to let Anwar explain…and Karpal was talking something else.
    Out come….the Mr Speaker with his mumbo jumbo nonsensical reasons…suspending all 4 for 6 months.
    Najib must be extremely happy with his loyal burong kakatua trained to talk what he is there
    UMNO B …animal houses ..they are in court and in Parliament.
    For this…Najib can claim..he is one up better than Mahathir….which actually mean Najib is bringing Mahathr’s UMNO B…. to hell.. faster.

  37. #37 by boh-liao on Thursday, 16 December 2010 - 11:47 pm

    With a murder- n scandal-tainted boss, his bola-carrying lackeys must always protect him fr attacks n being exposed by others in order to get a pat fr d boss

  38. #38 by danieltkb on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 12:11 am

    PR will getting increase votes .
    it is getting too much and the rakyat
    dont like this gov.
    one and for all, we do not like this gov
    All the in human must end , now !

  39. #39 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 5:31 am

    It was reported that Pakatan Rakyat (PR) threatened to sue Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia, wanted to take the suspensions to Court and ask for judicial review whether they were lawful.

    According to report of TheMalaysianInsider’s Asrul Hadi Abdullah Sani December 16, 2010, de facto minister of law Dato Seri Nazri Aziz described Karpal’s “statement was ridiculous” and was confident that such a case would be thrown out…The Speaker has already said there is a judgment by one judge that the court has got no jurisdiction over parliamentary proceedings…There is the sovereignty of Parliament and supremacy of Parliament… They have got cow dung in their heads I assure you that if they take it to court it will be kicked out. What law did Karpal learn? He is a third-class lawyer” .

    Lets see what the Constitution says first. On Parliamentary proceedings, the applicable provision, Article 63(1) of our Constitution says “The validity of any proceedings in either House of Parliament or any committee thereof shall not be questioned in any court.” On proceedings in State legislative assembly, the applicable provision article 72(1) of the Constitution speaks, in same vein, that “the validity of any proceedings in the Legislative Assembly of any State shall not be questioned in any court.

    There are two important words here – firstly, the expression “shall not be questioned in any court” and secondly the word “proceedings”.

    The first generally means that the Courts cannot go behind and review or question and decide whether proceedings or decisions of speakers, whether in parliamentary or state legislative assemblies, are regular and legal or otherwise.

    That the Constitution says like that is because of the underlying concept of separation of power between Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches (mentioned by Nazri).

    Under this concept of separation of power between Executive, Legislative and Judicial Branches, the inter play of functions between the 3 branches takes this tripartite form : (a) the Executive/ ie Federal or State Governments propose legislation/laws (b) Parliament or State assemblies debate, make and pass these laws and legislations and (c) the judiciary/ courts interpret these laws and legislations.

    As far as the legislative is concerned, it also implies as Nazri said, “sovereignty of Parliament and supremacy of Parliament”.

    However one has to ask what’s exactly the scope of “sovereignty of Parliament and supremacy of Parliament” or for that matter any State Assembly when it relates to their respective “proceedings” where both Article 63(1) and 72(1) of our Constitution, say in plain language, that the validity of any of these proceedings in either House of Parliament or any committee thereof or any State assembly shall not be questioned in any court???

  40. #40 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 6:09 am

    Continuing: If I were an impartial judge upholding the Rule of Law & Cause o Democracy and of course Rakyat’s interest I would balance the power of the legislative chambers of Parliament/State Assembly as against the Courts in this way :-

    (1) The Judiciary/Courts do accept the supremacy of Parliament/State Assemblies in making laws. The Courts will not review that “supremacy” in the sense of questioning whether the laws made were well thought out or debated before they were passed; that Courts will, when interpreting laws, uphold the intent of Parliament/State Assemblies in passing such laws. The Courts will even respect the decisions of Parliamentary Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia or, for that matter, that of Perak State Assembly Speaker (never mind whether its PR’s one in the case of V Sivakumar or the BN’s one Zambry Abdul Kadir when it concerns how each Speaker, by interpreting and enforcing standing orders, maintains the necessary order, decorum and civility with which it is necessary to debate and decide on law making and passing of legislations, which is the paramount function of any legislative body.

    (2) But a line has to be drawn somewhere. Whilst Parliament or a State Assembly guided by the Speaker could make any law it wants in the name of sovereignty and supremacy of legislature – of which courts cannot question – the judiciary/courts have a right to interfere and question when that Parliament or State Assembly crosses the line to now play and usurp the role of a court on matters of procedures to discipline, suspend and revoke privileges of the member of Parliament or a State Assembly from discharging his responsibilities as wakil rakyat!

    As much as there is sovereignty and supremacy of Legislature (Parliament or State Assembly) to make laws there is also sovereignty and supremacy of Judiciary / Courts to uphold Justice and fair play. Separation of Powers implies balance of power between Executive, Legislature & Judiciary each being sovereign in their respective roles but does not mean that one can transgress to the other’s territory (in this case the Legislature to the Judiciary) and tell the latter to hands off and fly kites!

    On the basis of the above I would say that the correct position is –

    Whether dealing with Executive or Legislature, if suspension or punishment of anyone is unfair or unjust by reason of the Parliamentary or state assemblies’ procedures not being followed and more importantly the Rule of Natural Justice not being followed, etc, then courts can always “question” ie Judicial Review is necessary in order to safeguard against abuse of power by an all important Executive or a Legislative Assembly dominated by majority ruling coalition and parties! Courts/Judges are respecters of no person just because one is high and the other low or one from ruling party the other, from the opposition. If they are silent when legislative majority oppress the minority in Legislature or the Executive bullies the subjects/rakyat, then judges have become derelict in their high judicial roles to mete Justice. They may as well discard their robes and join politics!

  41. #41 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 6:43 am

    Continuing: In context, the most unfortunate development here is the fact that our society is really polarized, and I don’t mean just on race or religious lines – but on political lines.

    Nobody cares the truth or internal consistency of principles or position – just which is more convenient or expedient to advance his side’s cause against the other. Let me now cite a few examples.

    When it comes to PR’s Sivakumar suspending BN’s Zambry from Perak State Assembly PR’s supporters including ex judge N H Chan cited articles 63(1) and 72(1) of the Constitution to argued that their clear language permitted no judicial review/interference. Nazri then took the opposite role he said “the law – [meaning Article 72(1)] – did not intend to equip a speaker of a legislative assembly with unrestricted authority”. The Federal Court also agreed and upheld Zambry’s position against Sivakumar.

    Flash forward to present when the position was reversed – ie when Parliament and its speaker suspended Gobind Deo for his outburst or presently when he also suspended Anwar, Sivarasa, Karpal Azmin – everyone’s positions also conveniently and expediently reverse and switch!

    Now Karpal says there is judicial review and says PR wants to sue and Nazri says the opposite, the law is clear that there is no judicial review, and it’s a third class lawyer who think otherwise. Karpal somewhat shoots himself in his own foot here. This is because in Gobind Deo’s case when Mohamad Ariff (Judicial Commissioner) ruled that Gobind though suspended was still entitled to his monthly salary and other monetary benefits as clearly stated in Article 64 of the Federal Constitution, Karpal was reported to have said then that “it was a fair ruling, the judge has done a lot of work and they (Karpal & his son) would not be appealing. Such a stance would seem that Karpal was agreeing that Courts could not review & question Parliamentary Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia’s decision to suspend Gobind, though he also cryptically declared that Mohamad Ariff’s decision was “landmark” of “far reaching consequences” in opening judicial review. I am unable to fathom how he came to that conclusion.

    Suffice to say I think the true position is that the stated by Nazri in Sivakumar vs Zambry – that a speaker (or for that matter any select disciplinary committee) of a legislative assembly (whether parliament or state assembly) does not have unrestricted authority to abuse power when it comes to him performing and executing procedures in quasi judicial role of disciplining and punishing members of such assemblies. It is not what he says now that the law is settled that Courts cannot interfere when the Speaker is a BN’s one and PR’s! PR’s problem is that its supporters are also not following what’s the right or wrong principle. They twist and switch positions on what is or should be the law, perhaps understandably because I surmise that they have no confidence in the impartiality of judiciary in upholding what’s the right principle consistently anyway!

  42. #42 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 6:49 am

    Correction of typo omissions in last para of preceding post –

    “Suffice to say I think the true position is that AS stated by Nazri in Sivakumar vs Zambry…”


    “… It is not what he says now that the law is settled that Courts cannot interfere when the Speaker is a BN’s one and NOT PR’s!…”

  43. #43 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 7:28 am

    It is a sad reflection of what we have all become when we care not of what is right and true and what is not – but just selectively choose that which conveniently supports our political cause.

    It is not just on the matter of interpreting whether courts have the right to interfere in a speaker’s powers to discipline and punish. Here our position is not dictated by what is the right position but whether the speaker or the one punished is on BN’s or PR’s side.

    The same it is with what Singapore officials/ Lee Kuan Yew said to Australian intelligence services as leaked by WikiLeaks – one part against Anwar/PR and the other Najib/BN.

    People don’t believe and don’t want to believe the part that is subversive of and contrary to their political allegiance/beliefs.

    Thus PR’s supporters will say the part that is damaging to Najib/BN is true and everyone knows that the other part is pure rubbish – and vice versa BN’s supporters will likewise take the reverse selective position.

    That we have become like that – ie. putting as priority not what is true/right but what as a matter of expedience and convenience supports or undermines our political cause in an “Ends justify the Means” approach suggests that we are involved in a “Life or Death” struggle for dignity, liberty and survival…

    The country is headed for doom when its people are polarized to such extent that they care no longer for right and wrong – but which political side, which race or which religion to uphold or to fight against!

    I have then no doubt whatsoever that such a state of affairs of extreme polarisation that distorts the entire perception of our people on both side of the political divide lends credence to the assessment of our Southern neighbour that we were headed for “dangerous” decline.

  44. #44 by HJ Angus on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 8:03 am

    this type of anarchy occurs when the majority of MPs just “follow the leader” blindly and do not care enough to protect the sanctity of Parliament.

  45. #45 by undertaker888 on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 8:53 am

    parliament? we never had a parliament ever since the mahaevil mamak sat on the throne. ever since that we have

    1. institutionalized discrimination
    2. institutionalized corruption
    3. institutionalized paedophile

  46. #46 by Jeffrey on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 9:07 am

    It’s a simple equation.

    Look at the equation this way. We’ve got a parliamentary select disciplinary committee (majority – BN).

    It decided to judge Anwar wrong for raising the APCO/Isreal 1 Malaysia/1 Israel issue.

    It heard only one side of the story – APCO’s. But it didn’t afford Anwar the right to reply/defend.

    Whether Anwar were flippant and contemptuous of parliament should be decided by committee only after hearing both sides, the accuser and the one accused in accordance with Rules of Natural Justice.

    If the majority of committee didn’t do that and recommended suspension of Anwar, then its wrong.

    If Karpal & Sivarasa walked out, it was because the committee by majority proceeded the wrong course in coming to such a decision.

    Now Karpal & Sivarasa are both accused of contravening confidentiality of committee’s proceedings and also suspended and along with Azmin who supported them against Speaker.

    But one has to ask if Karpal & Sivarasa had not broken confidentiality of these breach of natural justice, then confidentiality of such committee per standing orders would be used to protect the majority committee’s wrong course and decision to suspend Anwar without affording him fundamental right to defend. When such a committee recommends its decision to Parliament, then majority again will endorse it.

    This is tantamount to brute majority at committee level and then at Parliament has been used to support a course of action leading to wrongful suspension of Anwar due to breach of the principles of Natural Justice and also punishmnt of whistlblowers like Karpal/Sivarasa who whistle blew to prevent Parlaiment from taking the wrong course!

    It is disingenious to argue that Supremacy or Sovereignty of Parliament triumphs over all including its or its committee’s wrong actions.

    Surely Courts can intervene. Courts cannot question Parliament or its select committees on its law making and enforcement of standing orders (house rules) – yes. But if Parliament or its committees for examples, don’t follow its own procedures and standing orders, if a member were disproportionately punished with unreasonable suspension of (say) 3 years without being accorded fundamental right to receive notice what exactly he has done wrong and to reply and defend against his accusers as guaranteed by our Constitution, does it mean under the excuse of Parliamentary Supremacy/sovereignty, one can ask Courts to back off when one is usurping its quasi judicial function of punishing a member?

    To argue so is to impute to the courts a kind of impotence to do justice and also by on stroke unfairly accusing Parliament, which is supposedly the citadel of freedom and democracy, of being prepared to perpetrate unjust actions under the pretext of Supremacy or Sovereignty of Parliament.

    It arises from a lack of understanding regarding that term means in the wider context of the doctrine of Separation of Powers.

  47. #47 by dagen on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 9:08 am

    Parliament = umno punya private club.

  48. #48 by k1980 on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 9:39 am

    Q: What is so ‘superior’ about a race which cannot compete on equal terms?

    A: Can walk around on 4 legs (2 real ones PLUS 2 crutches), while the ‘inferior’ races (called pendatangs) can only walk on 2 legs.

  49. #49 by Bigjoe on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 11:40 am

    Actually the action against Anwar surprised me. By and large, traditionally, UMNO/BN are very practical when it comes to using force. When I look at the practicality of this use of force, I don’t see that much in it.

    The whole purpose of such a use of force cannot be just formal, it must be about negating the magic spin-maker that is Anwar. Such a severe punishment for bringing up APCO reflects not simply the subject but really a very high fear of Anwar’s spin-making ability.

    Why is there so much fear or is it something else?

    If you ask me, it appear this is more about Najib who think its best not to stand in the way of the irrational right-wingers who wants Anwar’s blood.

    Firstly, why is the right winger so intense about this thing. Anwar may be a magic spin-doctor that they can’t match but so what? There is a long list of issues that Anwar can do the same. What is the point of getting all worked up about one?

    Lets just say the subject matter is special and they think deserve vitriol. This method of dealing with it has its downside. There are better option – just get rid of APCO for one. Why is the right winger not advising Najib to drop them – its a lobby/PR group – there is a long list of alternatives. What is so special about APCO? Retreat in this case would have been the better part of valour NOT being bull headed about it.

    Then there is the way it was executed. No notice, no pre-amble of the discussion – they wanted to do it fast and quick and hope to cut of Anwar at the issue. What chance do they have unless they throw Anwar into jail and even then? It seem they decided to do it, then realized the success possibility was not good and did a hurried job.

    If you ask me, too much of this whole thing reeks of emotional outburst and many people, including Najib not taking responsibility for it. It smells like Najib have much he is not in control of and if that is true that what is happening right now is a runaway train – Najib is simply not in control and don’t have decent plan.

  50. #50 by boh-liao on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 12:14 pm

    We want d latest LEAK fr diplomats n foreign ministry officers on what they said abt dis latest actions of our BN-controlled parliament

    Wonder what latest derogatory remarks they hv made on NR, Pandikar, n Nazi

  51. #51 by monsterball on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 12:26 pm

    The first Road Show speech available at Anwar’s blog…go see it…is great…speaking non stop for one hour with thoughts flowing out smoothly from his head..uttering all out…with no second thought to cover himself up and fool listeners.
    And that’s only possible…when one is all truthful.
    He is witty …forceful and focused.
    Now go look at Mahathir being interviewed by Rockybru at his Bread opening shop ceremony.
    He smiled…put out an appearance he does not understand the question…to buy him time to think…and what answer to give…..and cannot find good answer.. .say our nonsensical replies…..smiling..and make sure idiots think he has answered well.
    His time for others to question him is only 5 minutes…as if he is such a busy man…but infact…trying hard to avoid more questions to answer.
    Yes..he has shown to Najib how to put out a blod front with a smile and mind must tuned to fell no guilt at all…then all idiots keep seeing him… such an innocent person.
    Suspended for 6 months is a blessing to Anwar.
    He can now go all over Malaysia and speak to the voters…instead of sitting at that Kangaroo Parliament arguing…getting nothing.

  52. #52 by boh-liao on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 3:19 pm

    RIP, Johor Tenang assemblyman; TQ 4 d coming buy election

  53. #53 by Taxidriver on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 10:57 pm

    ” wonder what latest derogatory remarks they hv made on NR, Pandikar, n Nazi” – boh liao

    Malaysia is governed by a bunch of corrupt, lustful, lawless, stupid, murderous and shorted-sighted bumps. Really pity the stupid Malaysian voters who have supported them the past 53 years!

  54. #54 by Taxidriver on Friday, 17 December 2010 - 11:16 pm

    UMNOB claim Malays is a supreme race. Malays is God’s chosen race. But they have disgraced God when they shamelessly admitted they cannot compete with other races and must rely on a tongkat. In fact, it is these UMNOputras who are giving the Malays and Islam a poor image in the eyes of the world.

    Ha ha ha…..SUPREME race cannot compete with other races. Mamak should be skinned alive for insulting the Malays!

You must be logged in to post a comment.