1 Malaysia

Sudahkah kita bersedia?

KERAJAAN PERPADUAN: PERMULAAN MENCARI PERSAMAAN

Definisi

 Mengikut artikel yang ditulis oleh Wan Abdul Rahman, Harakah Online…

Kerajaan Perpaduan dapat didefinisikan sebagai “satu kerajaan campuran yang besar terdiri dari semua parti politik (atau semua parti politik yang penting) yang berada dalam satu Dewan Perundangan (legislature) dan biasanya dibentuk dalam masa perang atau lain-lain keadaan dharurat yang dihadapi oleh sesebuah negara.”

Dari takrifan ini ia memperlihatkan bahawa kerajaan perpaduan bukanlah merupakan satu struktur politik yang kekal. Ia bersifat sementara, iaitu ia diwujudkan dalam keadaan-keadaan yang kritikal (seperti semasa perang dan krisis ekonomi yang meruncing) bagi menjamin kelangsungan negara itu sendiri.

Ini bermakna perbezaan pandangan antara parti yang memerintah dan pembangkang perlu dikesampingkan. Atas dasar inilah kerajaan perpaduan adalah sebuah kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai pembangkang.

Namun, dalam konteks kerajaan perpaduan yang akn dibincangkan dalam tulisan kali ini, saya ingin meminda definisi ‘ diwujudkan dalam keadaan-keadaan yang kritikal’ dan ‘kerajaan yang tidak mempunyai pembangkang’ atas dua alasan. 

Pertama, Malaysia tidak berada dalam keadaan kritikal seperti perang dan sebagainya. Oleh itu, dalam konteks membina kerajaan perpaduan seperti yang dicanangkan oleh YB Tok Guru Hadi Awang ialah pembinaan kerajaan perpaduan yang berlandaskan persefahaman dan bukan atas keadaan yang terdesak. Maka penubuhan kerajaan perpaduan itu ditakrifkan sebagai kerjasama UMNO dan Pas dalampersefahaman untuk menyingkirkan perbezaan, memperbanyak persamaan dan merapatkan jurang ideologi politik.

Kedua, dalam kontek ini juga, penolakan wujudya pembangkan ialah tidak rasional dan tidak bertepatan dengan premis. Pembangkang wujud, tetapi sebagai sebahagian daripada kerajaan. Kalau mengikut standard hari ini, pembangkang hanya terlibat dalam sesi perdebatan di parlimen atau di dewan undangan negeri. Tetapi dalam konteks kerajaan perpaduan, pembangkang turut memainkan peranan pentadbiran dalam kerajaan disamping menjalankan tugas sebagai ‘check and balance’ kerajaan.

Paradigma Baru

Saya berpendapat, sudah tiba masanya PAS dan Umno melihat kepada persepsi baru terhadap kedudukan dan ideologi politik masing-masing. Sekian lama, UMNO dan PAS bertengkar sesama sendiri hanya kerana perbezaan interpretasi politik. Kalau kita menghalusi pendirian parti-parti tersebut, mereka mempunyai titik persamaan yang sangat jelas iaitu ISLAM dan tunjang untuk menegakkan ISLAM ialah Melayu.

PAS perlu melihat usahanya untuk bekerjasam dengan UMNO sebagai usaha untuk memperluaskan ISLAM yang syumul kepada ahli UMNO yang dikatakan mengamalkan Islam liberal.Namun saya yakin, dalam kalangan ahli UMNo sendiri pun mahu meihat tertegaknya agama Islam dalam pemerintahan. Ada diantara mereka yang tidak mengambil langkah untuk menentang UMNO dengan menyertai parti lain, sebaliknya masuk ke dalam UMNO untuk memperbetulkan apa yang tidak betul daripada perspektif ISLAM.

UMNO pula perlu melihat usahanya untuk bekerjasama dengan PAS sebagai usaha untuk menyatukan Orang Melayu dan mendukung perlembagaan UMNO sendiri iaitu untuk mempertahankan Islam sebagai agama rasmi. Bukankah pembentukan negara Islam menjamin status ini? Sekali lagi kita melihat bahawa Islam menjadi titik persamaan antara kedua-dua parti ini.

Walau bagaimanapun, UMNO lebih sederhana dalam memperjuangkan Islam kerana tidak menuntut secara terang-terangan pembentukan sebuah negara ISLAM. Manakala PAS pula inginkan negara Islam yang berdaulat tertegak di Malaysia. Saya yakin, objektif kedua-dua parti sukar dicapai dalam jangka masa panjang kalau tidak ada kerjasama antara kedua-duanya berasaskan persamaan yang ada.

Untuk mencapai negara Islam, Pas memerlukan sekutu yang kuat dan ramai penganut Islam yang sudi mendokong idea negara Islam. Umno pula perlu kekal relevan demi orang melayu dan parti yang besar melayu keahliannya ialah PAS. Mungkin pada awalnya kerjasama ini seakan-akan sukar namun sekiranya kita berfikiran jauh dan komited dalam usaha ini, sesuatu yang mencipta sejarah bakal kita saksikan.

Lagi pun. sampai bila kita mahu membiarkan perpecahan ini berlaku sedangkan Islam sendiri menyarankan agar umatnya sentiasa bersatu seolah-olah kita ini bersaudara. Usana membina persefahaman dalam pembentukan kerajaan perpaduan ini dilihat sebagai suatu langkah permulaan unutk merealisasikan persaudaraan Islam yang dituntut itu. 

‘‘Saya pernah menyatakan sebelum ini yang kita bersikap terbuka berhubung cadangan tersebut dan kita juga bersedia untuk mendengar dan menimbang cadangan yang dikemukakan oleh Pas mengenainya (kerajaan perpaduan),’’ -Najib

“Pakatan Rakyat dan kerajaan UMNO/BN sendiri menyokong gagasan kerajaan perpaduan yang dicadangkan oleh saya untuk menyelesaikan masalah negara yang berlaku. Semua pihak termasuk Pakatan Rakyat perlu memahami dahulu konsep secara terperinci kerana ini merupakan perkara yang baru di Malaysia dan untuk memastikan ia dapat dilaksanakan dengan baik,”-Hadi Awang

Kebaikan dan Kepentingan

Saya bersetuju dengan Tn Haji Hadi Awang iaitu perpaduan ini mampu menyelesaikan banyak masalah. Hal ini mungkin kerana beliau berpendapat bahawa masalah utama untuk menubuhkan kerajaan Islam ialah Umno. Cuma daripada menjadi musuh politik, adalah lebih baik diadakan kerjasama untuk mengurangkan pergeseran dan salah  faham serta meningkatkan kerjasama. Umno pula perlu sedar, tanpa sokongan Pas objektif parti tidak kesampaian bahkan asas-asas Umno dalam kalangan masyarakat kian pudar.

Apabila umat Islam Malysian bersatu, maka dapatlah diterapkan unsur-unsur Islam dalam pentadbiran maka kuranglah salah guna kuasa ( ISA dll), rasuah, dan diskriminasi kaum. Kerajaan yang lebih adil dan saksama dapat dilahirkan lantas memberi ruang kepada perkembangan demokrasi dan hak asasi manusia. Mungkin pandangan ini terlalu idealistik, namun harus ada semangat dan kesabaran dalam merealisasikan visi ini. Setiap visi ada permulaanya, dan usaha kearah pembentukan kerajaan perpaduan ialah salah satu jalan kearah persekutuan ummah tersebut.

Penyatuan umat juga akan memberi keyakinan kepada rakyat Malaysia yang lain untuk terus bernaung di bawah agama Islam yang tidak akan sekali-kali mengenepikan hak merekan dalam politik, sosial dan juga pendidikan. Bukti Islam dapat diterima oleh bangsa lain ialah kelab penyokong PAS. Ahlinya lebih kurang 10 000 orang dan diketuai oleh seorang lelaki cina. Sejarah juga membuktikan bahawa bangsa tidak menjadi soal dalam pentadbiran dan hanya agama yang menjadi titik tolak. Dan disebabkan Islam dan agama lain berkongsi nilai-nilai universal yang hampir sama, maka muafakat mudah dicapai dengan bangsa-bangsa lain. Maka idea Bangsa Malaysia juga dapat dicapai. 

Komplikasi

Halangan yang terbesar ialah daripada ahli-ahli kedua-dua parti itu sendiri. Sikap ‘resistance to change’  hanya akan menumpulkan lagi usaha untuk mencapai permuafakatan ummah. Jangan lihat dari segi musuh politik sebaliknya lihat kepada tercapainya objektif parti. Asalkan objektif parti tercapai segala kemungkinan harus diambil kira. Bukankah parti itu sendiri ditubuhkan unutk mencapai objektif dan pendirian yang telah ditetapkan?

Sebagai orang Islam, marilah kita penuhi tuntutan Rasulullah supaya bermaafan antara kita dan selagi ada mana peluang untuk bersatu, kita harus bersatu. Para pemimpin parti pula harus mempergiat usaha untuk menerangkan konsep kerajaan perpaduan ini agar ahli-ahli jelas dan faham akannya.

Tentangan daripada parti-parti yang menolak gagasan negara Islam ini seperti DAP dan MCA juga perlu ditangani secara bijak oleh pemimpin PAS dan UMNO. Sesi dialog yang berterusan mungkin boleh menjadi medium untuk memperjelas kabaikan dan kelebihan pembentukan negara Islam kepada orang-orang bukan ISLAM. Mungkin agak sukar dan memerlukan masa yang lama, tetapi usah itu tetap usaha dan selagi negara islam tidak tertegak ,maka adalah wajib bagi setiap umat untuk berusaha kearahnya walaupun memakan masa yang panjang. Yang penting komitmen yang berterusan.

Parti komponen lain dalam Pakatan Rakyat dan Barisan nasional juga mungkin tidak bersetuju dalam hal ini, tetapi ini terpulang kepada kebijaksanaan pimpinan untuk memperjelas keadaan kepada mereka yang membantah dan tidak mengerti.

 

1 Malaysia: What Malaysians Think

These are some snippets of Malaysians opinions on 1 Malaysia.

“1Malaysia concept is the idea about making all malaysians of different ethnicities and religions to fully understand and respect each other’s cultures, and to live together, work hand in hand and the sharing of responsibilites to achieve a better future for Malaysia in terms of socio economy and political stability”- raden

 

The 1 Malaysia that PM Najib is propagating to Malaysians is not an alien concept, but one that was a ‘common life style’ among our multiracial society in the years prior to independence, and up to the period of the 60’s.-Jen Muhamad Arshad

 

1 Malaysia vision is a good initiative, a way forward and a unity platform to unite the citizens of this country as Oneness, and to seek continuous peace, harmonization, unification, civilization, modernization, advancement and righteousness. Is 1 Malaysia mean ”One Direction” to uphold, maintain and nationalize Patriotisms, Interdependence, Independence and Internationalism. There’s no 1 Malaysia if there’s no East Malaysia? There’s no “Tanah Melayu” if there’s no native lands, and so is Sarawak or Sabah’s state lands if there’s no “usucapion” and “usufrutus”. Is 1 Malaysia means diversity? Is 1 Malaysia mean to unite the smart people and elite group only and not 2nd and 3rd class citizens and/or rural communities?-gkm2020

Can we MUSLIMS trust Barack Obama?

Judge by yourselves. This was his speech made in Cairo today.

“The cycle of suspicion and discord must end,” he declared, to enthusiastic applause. “I have come to seek a new beginning, based on co-operation and respect.” Punctuated with quotations from the Koran, the speech ranged from pressing issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan and Iran’s nuclear ambitions, to questions such as democracy and women’s rights, ending with a vision of a more tolerant and peaceful world.

The American president did not shy from chiding Muslims for the reticence of some to condemn violent extremism or a tendency to measure one’s own faith by rejection of another. He made a strong pitch for America’s own model of religious freedom, and called for understanding of the historicalsuffering of Jews, castigating the denial of the Nazi Holocaust as “baseless, ignorant and hateful”, in an indirect swipe at Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. But he also evoked Palestinian suffering, describing their situation as intolerable. He forthrightly repeated his demand for an end to Jewish colonisation of Palestinian territory.

Mr Obamahas reached out to Muslims before, granting his first interview as president to an Arab satellite channel, beaming a warm message to Iranians for their spring festival, and speaking at a conference on religious tolerance in Istanbul. But this speech fulfilled his pre-inauguration promise to make a bold bid to restore American prestige with a direct public address in a major Muslim capital.

Will Mr Obama’s rousing oratory have the desired effect? The legacy of the Bush years, which accumulated injuries ranging from the invasion of Iraq in 2003 to scandalous treatment of Muslim prisoners to a perceived deepening of American bias towards a belligerent Israel, still embitters many Muslims. Opinion polls that showed a drastic slide in American prestige have nudged upward under Mr Obama, with his own popularity far higher than that of the nation he represents.

Yet the constant refrain, heard on Cairo’s streets as well as from media pundits, is that Arabs and Muslims would like to see Mr Obama’s words matched by deeds. “To win our hearts, you must win our minds first, and our minds are set on the protection of our interests,” declared one of the reams of editorials, columns and open letters from across the region.

Broadly speaking, and despite the latest internet tirades of Osama bin Laden, most Muslims recognise the complexity and sincerity of Mr Obama’s effort to extricate America from Iraq, and, more grudgingly, his similarly tricky quandary in Afghanistan. The one issue where Muslim opinion converges, with a demand for a change in America’s approach, is Palestine. Here, arguably, no American action can be expected fully to assuage Muslim and Arab grievances fast, partly because of what Mr Obama described as America’s “unbreakable bond” with Israel and partly because half of the Palestinians’ divided polity is run by Hamas, an Islamist group still seen as anathema to the America. But the fact that Israelis are plainly rattled by Mr Obama’s intentions, as his administration persists in pressing them on the issue of Jewish settlement on occupied land, has cheered their foes immensely.

Mr Obama’s determination to make communication with Muslims a priority will bring relief and hope across the Middle East and farther afield. The difficulty now lies in translating the new goodwill into action, not just by America, but by its Arab and Muslim allies.

This is another one from Times.com.

 

 –By Scott MacLeod/Cairo

President Obama’sspeech in Cairo today is the most important address ever given by an American leader about the Middle East. As he told 1,000 people at Cairo University and millions more around the world, everything won’t be solved by a speech. Yet it was an unprecedented reach-out to Muslims and particularly to the Arab world. Far more than any other U.S. president in the past, he both acknowledged harmful Western policies during the Colonial and Cold War eras and promised an intense personaleffort to resolve the region’s problems and build a new era based on mutual cooperation and respect. The clear message Obama delivered—in his words, body language and statement of policies– was that America is determined to be part of the solution in the Middle East. He didn’t arrive or depart as a prophet, but for an American president treading into territory inhospitable to U.S. policies, he won some new adherents. 

The audience responded to Obama’s fine rhetoric and frequent quotations from the Koran with repeated applause. At the end as he stood on the stage and waved, a group of Egyptian students in the balcony rhythmically began chanting, “He’s our man! He’s our man!” When Obama spoke about democracy during the speech, one man in the audience shouted, “We love you!” But the audience also responded well to Obama’sspecifics, including a statement opposing Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian West Bank—an unusually strong display of criticism of America’s ally, given that it was delivered from the heart of an Arab capital. When I asked him what he liked about the speech, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul-Gheit, who personally welcomed Obama at Cairo International airport a few hours earlier, told me: “Everything.” Agreed Mahmoud Essam, 14, a student at Towfeyeh school in Shubra, who also attended the speech: “All of it was fantastic.”

 

 As he has done on other occasions, Obama shepherded credibility by pointing to his own Islamic roots. Even as he openly declared himself to be a Christian, he spoke proudly about the generations of Muslims in his father’s Kenyan family, and of his own experience attending school as a boy in Indonesia, the largest Muslim country. What characterized Obama’s speech as something fresh was its straight talk, an apparent attempt to win further political credit by acknowledging past U.S. policies that were detrimental and then to use that credit to demand better attitudes and actions from the Middle East as well.  Obama recounted U.S. mistakes after 9/11, such as the invasion of Iraq, the establishment of the Guantanamo prison and use of torture against Muslim prisoners. But he called on Muslims to abandon the stereotype that everything America represents and does is bad, and physically bristled at the notion, still widespread in the Arab world, that the al-Qaeda attack on the U.S. in 2001 was somehow justifiable.

 

 The straight talk enabled Obama to glide through a minefield of competing interests. He appealed to governments (and equally to the Arab street) with his strong opposition to Israeli settlements and his demand that the region’s leaders accept the two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflic. Although he began by reaffirming America’s unbreakable bond with Israel and his demand that Hamas cease terrorist attacks, it was a clear elbow in the direction of Israel’s right-wing leader, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who favors settlements and opposes Palestinian independence. But he also won plaudits from many citizens and earned frowns from autocrats with his frank, forceful call for democracy, human rights and women’s rights in Arab countries—and a warning to Arab regimes not to use the conflict with Israel to divert attention from needed domestic reforms. Obama continued his reach-out to the Iranian regime; he acknowledged Iran’s right to nuclear energy while linking his opposition to it’s nuclear program to fears about proliferation and escalating threats that would endanger Iranians as well.

 

 Obamacame to Cairo as part of the “conversation” with the Muslims that he started in his inauguraladdress, when he envisioned a new relationship based on mutual interest and respect. “This cyrcle of suspicion and discord must end,” he declared at Cairo University. Without a doubt, he now has the Islamic world listening.

 

 

I believe this is a new leap for all of us given by this black president. However, we demand of more stern and aggressive approach to be applied in Israel-Palestinian conflict as it is obvious the newly elected PM Netanyahu of Israel, is reluctant to go ’soft’ with the Palestinian. In fact, the very existence of the illegal state, Israel is the cause of clashes between the West ( USA primarily) and the Muslim world. Be aggressive to Israel first as they shed the first blood. Although the US supports the Israel, but surely she should learn to control her vicious friend. Hope is still afar for Barack Obama, but trust you may gain. Now I hope you act swiftly before the trust is lost yet again.

TRAITS OF LEADERS THAT MALAYSIA NEED

The current and future wave of change troughout Malaysia demand a stronger and more competent leader. Such leader is very important to heal the growing econimic ailment and to deal with challenging social + racial issues. This leader will affect the hearts of Malaysians in many aspects of life as Malaysians nowdays are taking seriously on who they vote. Although party-based voting is still a huge factor, but looking into the future, part will play minimal role in determining the success of a candidate. he alone must prove that he is competent and strong enough to carry the people’s will. Below are several traits and postulations of the future great leader of Malaysia.

 

1.   Leaders that can alleviate hardship

Postulation

This trait is and will still become visible and strong in Sabah and Sarawak rural areas. In fact in many areas with dense low and middle income population, this characteristic is the first criteria of evaluation. Everyone wants a helpful leader.

 

2.   Vocal leaders

Postulation

Nowdays, candidates must win voters by speech. In Malaysia, ceramah is oftenly used to deploy the right rhetoric to win votes. However, vocal leaders is those who speak up the demands of the people. He or she will have to bring the grief of the people and bring it to higher authority. Speaking consistently in any media is essential too, to maintain support from the people. Yell the right thing on behalf of the people, and you  will win their heart.People are more attracted to vocal leaders that dare to go against the tide to voice out their problems.

 

3.   Leaders that are willing to sacrifice

Postulation

Malaysian love to see that their leader is feeling and perhaps living like them. Living like them means leaders will abandon their richness which can be question by the people and live the life of an average Malaysian, no strata whatever. This type of leader can be found in the rural areas but not in the city. Those who can adopt an average living will have a a chance to buy the voters heart.It builds respect and credibility. People will trust you. They will know that you are not ought for money but for service.

 

4.   More authoritative

Postulation

As many verbal war will spur in our future political scene, leaders need to respond quickly and intelligently to incoming accusations. The credibility of a leader must not be put at stake caused by the opponent. Internet is a very powerful tool for leaders to utilize. A leader must also be bold enough to bring about change. Initially they will get many drawbacks but if they maintain in their cause, the chance of success is higehr. People are more confident to stand behind a stronger and bold leader.

 

5.   Leaders that always meet them

Postulation

Meet them is not necessarily from house to house but at least make the people feel your presence. The political center of the party need to play an active role in promoting the leader and his activities. This will ensure continuous update for the peole. It is like la report to the people on the benefits that they get when they voted that leader.

 

 

Anwar,Lompat Parti dan Perak

Sejak isu 16 september lagi, isu lompat parti telah digembar-gemburkan oleh DSAI. Menurut beliau, ketika itu sudah ada lebih kurang 30 orang ahli parlimen BN yang akan ‘melompat’ ke parti Pembangkang untuk menubuhkan kerajaan persekutuan yang baru. Namun sehingga ke hari ini, mimpi hanya tinggal mimpi, harapan hanya tinggal harapan. Untuk menubuhkan kerajaan persekutuan bukan masalahnya, tetapi kaedah yang digunapakai itu tidak adil dan tidak demokratik. Sepatutnya, gunakanlah pilihanraya, barulah adil dan demokratik. Tetapi yang ironinya, beliau dikatakan sebagai ‘the champion of democracy’ tetapi adakah ianya demokrasi jika menumbangkan kerajaan BN, yang masih dipilih majoriti rakyat  dengan cara semurah itu? Tidak sama sekali. Mari kita kaitkan dengan isu tumbangnya kerajaan Pakatan di Perak baru-baru ini kesan daripada lompat parti.

NEGERI HARU BIRU!

Nampak. kesan lompat parti. Baru empat orang yang melompat, sudah kecoh satu Perak .Sampai sekarang tidak ada kesudahan untuk episod merebut kuasa di Perak. Yang ditumbangkan tidak puas hati, yang menang pula tidak sanggup mengaku salah. Inilah yang akan terjadi apabila berlakunya lompat melompat dalam politik semasa. Sehinggakan berlaku kekecohan di DUN negeri yang sangat memalukan. Hadir pula FRU yang mengawal jalan, bangunan kerajaan, berlakunya demonstrasi di jalanan, sehinggakan institusi Raja juga tercabar. Inilah bahana pergelutan kuasa antara wakil-wakil politik kita. Yang merana siapa? rakyat juga. Sudah hampir tiga bulan isu ini berlarutan. Keadaan perniagaan dan peluang pelaburan di negeri ini terjejas. Ialah, setiap hari ada isu. Hari ini lapor pada Zambry, 21 jam seterusnya kepada Nizar pula. Siapa menteri besar sebenarnya?…

Mahkamah tinggi pula tidak sefahaman dengan dengan mahkamah persekutuan. Sekejap kata begini, sekejap kata begitu. Nah, menjejaskan imej sistem judisiari sahaja.  Hal ini belum dipanjangkan lagi kepada persepsi dunia terhadap Malaysia. Blogger-blogger menuduh BN memalukan negara kerana ISU HITAM di DUN Perak apabila Sivakumar diheret keluar dewan. Namun, hakikatnya jelas mereka kurang ilmu tentang undang-undang, maklumlah baru berapa bulan menjadi kerajaan negeri. Mengeluarkan kenyataan akhbar sewenag-wenangnya, menuduh itu ini, yang belum tentu benarnya, asalkan mereka dapat mencontengkan arang di muka pihak lawan. BN pula menggunakan cara tidak sah mengambil alih kerajaan negeri. Bak kata TUN MAHATHIR, membuat keputusan terburu buru.

SIAPA PUNYA IDEA?

Semua ini berlaku kerana adanya empat orang wakil rakyat yang memberikan sokongan kepada pihak lawan. Kesannya?…Buka sahaja dada-dada akhbar, carilah isu tentang Perak. Namun kita balik kepada persoalan pokok. Siapakah yang punya Idea ini?…Jawapannya DSAI. Beliaulah yang mula menguar-uarkan idea menipu rakyat ini. Hari ini Pakatan pimpinan Anwar bising dan menuduh macam-macam kepada BN melibatkan  isu Perak. Walhal mereka jugalah yang menyokong gagasan ‘lompat-melompat’ Anwar ini suatu ketika dahulu. BN memang salah, tetapi cuba bayangkan kalau berlakulah 30 orang ahli parlimen BN bertukar ke PR pula, tidakkah negara ini yang akan haru biru?

Malaysia Haru BIRU!?

Skala tragedi di Perak itu kalau diperluaskan lagi keperingkat nasional, maka silap hari bulan kita juga akan mengikuti jejak langkah Thailand yang hampir setiap 4 bulan menukar Perdana Menteri. Berlaku tunjuk perasaan setiap hari dan ekonomi jatuh meleset. Sehinggakan persidangan ASEAN pun terpaksa ditangguhkan.  Jelas sudah Idea Anwar ini kurang diterima akal. tahniah kepada Pakatan yang tidak bersetuju dengan cara ini antaranya Nik Aziz. Tok Guru pun tidak bersetuju dengan cara ini. Adakah kita mahu Malaysia jadi begitu dek kerana ahli-ahli parlimen kita yang teringin menjadi KATAK?

TIDAK – Pasti kita mahu hidup aman damai dan persaingan politik kita biarlah persaingan yang sihat iaitu melalui pilihan raya. Macam di Perak, hanya pilihan raya jualah yang dapat menyelesaikan masalah bukannya Lompat melompat ini. Ternyata aktivit lompat melompat ini tidak demokratik dan mencemar nama baik RAKYAT MALAYSIA.

Ada sesiapa yang mahu lompat lagi? Atau mengharapkan orang lain melompat? Sudahlah, bawa bertaubat……

Nizar is the RIGHTful Menteri Besar- High Court

Rightful MB Nizar seeks royal audience, Zambry to vacate office

KUALA LUMPUR: The High Court here ruled on Monday that Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin is the rightful Perak Mentri Besar, and not Barisan Nasional’s Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir.

In an immediate response, Zambry said he would apply for a stay pending appeal. This was rejected by the court.

The court also ordered Zambry and the six executive councillors he had appointed to vacate their office.

An aide to Dr Zambry told the media that Perak Barisan Nasional will respect the court order and will vacate their offices at the state secretariat building immediately.

He added that Dr Zambry is on his way to Kuala Lumpur from Ipoh. Dr Zambry could not be reached for comment at press time.

Nizar left the courtroom saying he would seek an audience with the Sultan of Perak, Sultan Azlan Shah, to get his consent to dissolve the Assembly and call for fresh state elections.

He would make his request for the audience at a state function at the Istana Kuala Kangsar Tuesday morning.

In his ruling Monday, Justice Abdul Aziz Abd Rahim said that a new mentri besar could not be appointed as the office had not been vacated.

He said a mentri besar can only be dismissed by a vote of no confidence, and upheld the Stephen Kalong Ningkan ruling.

He noted that the Perak State Legislative did not hold a vote of no confidence.

In 1966, Sarawak Chief Minister Datuk Stephen Kalong Ningkan was ousted when the state governor showed him a letter of no confidence issued by 21 out of 42 legislators and asked Ningkan to resign.

Ningkan refused, saying the letters were not tantamount to a vote of no confidence in the state legislative assembly. He was sacked by the governor but eventually reinstated by the Borneo High Court, which saw the necessity of a formal vote of no confidence.

According to the Nutgraph, the judge ruled ruled that the governor can only dismiss the chief minister when both these conditions are satisfied:

(a) The chief minister has lost the confidence of the House, and

(b) The chief minister has refused to resign and failed to advise a dissolution.

Nizar had filed for a judicial review on Feb 13, seeking a declaration that he is the rightful mentri besar of Perak and an injunction to bar Dr Zambry from discharging his duties as the mentri besar.

On March 6, Justice Lau Bee Lan had ruled that there were constitutional issues involving the interpretation of Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution and later referred four consitutional questions to the Federal Court for determination.

However, on March 23, the Federal Court ruled that the case of who the rightful mentri besar is should be heard by the High Court.

Nizar’s lead counsel Sulaiman Abdullah, in wrapping up his submissions last week, said the Constitution was the “genius of the Malaysian people”, adding that the court had a duty to uphold it. Over the last few days, he had submitted that the Sultan, while granted powers in the Perak Constitution to appoint a mentri besar, could not dismiss him.

The only way Nizar could be dismissed, he said, was through a vote of no-confidence in the House.

He also said that a mentri besar could request for the State Assembly to be dissolved in the middle of a term without losing the confidence of the majority of the House.

Dr Zambry’s lawyer Datuk Cecil Abraham, however, argued that Nizar went by Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution when he sought an audience with the Sultan – this article specifically provides for the mentri besar to request for a dissolution when he has lost the confidence of the majority in the House.

Under the article, Nizar is required to tender the resignation of his executive councillors when his request was rejected, he said.

Najib vs Azizah

“Rakyat negeri Perak telah memilih wakil-wakil mereka dalam bulan Mac 2008, tetapi Umno-BN tidak mengikut peruntukan Perlembagaan untuk menjatuhkan kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat yang sah,” beliau berkata.-Wan Azizah, Suara Keadilan.

 

VS

 

He said people should not so easily forget about the plan to induce 31 Barisan MPs to join the opposition to enable the setting up of a new government before Sept 16 last year.

That, Najib said, was based on the same principle which the opposition did not consider as unconstitutional then.

“If we feel that can be done, why then it is wrong for three state representatives to support Barisan?” he asked.

Barisan took over the Perak Government in February after

three Pakatan Rakyat representatives quit their respective parties

to become pro-Barisan independents.-Najib, Star online