Silver State in sorry state

The ear of the leader must ring with the voices of the people

– Woodrow T Wilson

“Why O why Tuanku”’s reverberate throughout the nation – you know who, you know what, you know when, but you don’t know why!

Puzzling for such a learned man who wrote in his book ‘Constitutional Monarchy, Rule of Law and Good Governance in 2004’ that ...

... no sultan or agung had withheld consent to dissolve legislative body, except in Kelantan in 1977, and who also reminded us ...

... 'Under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would not withhold his consent to a request for dissolution of parliament. His role is purely formal' - see Malaysiakini Perak turmoil: Sultan has final say.

My learned visitor Observer gave a possible explanation and most likely reason for HRH’s very unpopular decision. Observer said:

I don't like the idea of toppling an elected government through frogs one bit at all - whether it’s done by PKR or by BN.

My mateys, who include some top-class retired lawyers had a sombre round of drinks last night, and we ended up with a heavy conversation around the Constitution.

I think the Sultan, faced with the swirling political controversy, chose to focus his decision based on just two paragraphs in the Perak Constitution - the Constitution of Malaysia has similar wordings.

(a) the Ruler shall first appoint as Menteri Besar to preside over the Executive Council a member of the State Legislature who in his judgment is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislature; and

(b) If the Menteri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the State Legislature, then, unless at his request the Ruler dissolves State Legislature, Menteri Besar shall tender his resignation and that of the Executive Council..

There you are, a very narrow focus on the constitution, setting aside any issues about frogging, whether the resulting government represents the will of the people etc. etc.

I'm afraid it’s appropriate per the Constitution.

Fair enough. Then I referred to Malaysian Insider, looking for views from Malik Imtiaz Sarwar who wrote in Perak: A constitutional crisis (relevant extracts only):

Now that the dust is settling, it is becoming clearer what it is that took place in Perak over the last 24 hours. My respectful view is that His Highness may have acted erroneously in directing the resignation of the menteri besar

… then yadda yadda (a recapitulation of the significant events) followed by yadda yadda (same as Observer’s comments) …

It must be borne in mind that:

· as noted above, Article 16(6) is specifically directed to a no-confidence scenario, that is the incumbent menteri besar can seek the dissolution of the assembly upon his having ceased to command the confidence of the majority

· Article 36(2) however provides more generally that His Highness has the power to dissolve the assembly. It is clear that this provision is aimed at allowing His Highness to dissolve the assembly for other reasons thought to be appropriate

· the Perak Constitution does not empower His Highness to dismiss the menteri besar. The manner in which the menteri besar is to be removed from office is as provided for under Article 16(6), through a refusal to dissolve the assembly at the request of the menteri besar when the menteri besar has ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the assembly.

It is apparent that His Highness had moved on the assumption that the request for dissolution was prompted by the menteri besar having ceased to command the confidence of the majority. This may have been based on a misapprehension of the situation and the appeal to the Sultan to dissolve the assembly for reasons other than confidence. If so, then the directive to resign was arguably not tenable.

Malik, being balanced and undoubtedly a nice polite bloke, used very careful ethical language to ‘suggest’ that HRH’s directive for Nizar to resign 'was arguably not tenable'!

In other words, HRH was wrong!

But more troubling was (what I thought to be unnecessarily threatening and hostile) HRH’s warning to Nizar that the MB doesn’t want to go, the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are considered vacant.

Wah, so fierce one!

Ok, it’s a great disappointment for everyone who thought HRH would be their silver bullet. Alas … all kena shot in their posterior liao wakakakakaka

What has been even far far more disturbing has been the nasty attempt of a pro-UMNO blogger (known to be a staunch Mahathir-ite) who has posted insinuations that MB Nizar has committed treason, though he tap-danced around by attributing the accusations to others (undoubtedly people of the same pro UMNO ilk).

What a f* under the belt low blow! It's like kicking a man already shackled and down on his back.

For this staunch Mahathir-iteIf, if he is trying to tar Nizar as Jebat, just remember what his hero, Dr Mahathir said of Hang Tuah in Malaysiakini:

Let me quote the story of Hang Tuah: Whenever the King gives an order, Hang Tuah and his brethrens would say, ‘mana titah, patih junjung’ (I will obey your bidding) [...] that is why Hang Tuah killed his friends. He was too loyal…

Even during the (first prime minister) Tunku (Abdul Rahman)’s time, I was not very loyal person. I am loyal only to what you do, not what you are. Do the wrong thing and I won’t support.

In Malaysiakini Vox Populi, Arianna wrote:

No matter what legal reasons or arguments prompted Sultan Azlan Shah to arrive at his decision, many will remember him as a party that robbed the people of Perak their right to choose a government.

It is indeed tragic that a sultan of his calibre would listen to some politicians and ignore the voice of his subjects.

Assuming that the sultan only adhered to the Perak constitution when making such a decision, then what about the constitutional rights of the Perak voters who made known their choice in the last general election?

Are they not worth anything at all? The sultan is the rakyat's last hope against thieves that abused the constitution for their own means.

If anything, the sultan has just open the floodgates for undemocratic power grabs instead of putting a stop to this shameful and despicable act.

So, ... whither the monarchy goes from now on?