e- papers

We Have moved . . . .

Go to   >    >  >> new Site     

Search This Blog

Monday, February 23, 2009

Pakatan mulls emergency sitting to deny Zambry access to state funds.

By SuaraKeAdilan English Team | Feb 23, 2009

Apart from tabling a vote of confidence in Menteri Besar Nizar Jamaluddin, the Pakatan Rakyat may also convene an emergency sitting of the Perak legislative assembly to cut off Umno-Barisan Nasional’s access to public funds for administration of the state.

“We do not rule out the possibility of tabling an emergency motion that the BN government is unconstitutional. Therefore it cannot be given any public funds for its administration,” said Nga Kor Ming, Perak DAP secretary.

The Pakatan and Umno-BN are at odds over who has control of the state government in Perak.

Taking into account the suspension of BN Menteri Besar Zambry Kadir and six ececutive councillors by the Perak state assembly Speaker, V Sivakumar, last week, the Pakatan has 28 seats versus the BN’s 21.

This would give the Pakatan the upperhand. However, despite the clear and public clamouring by Perakians for a snap election to choose the leadership they wanted, Zambry has refused to stand down.

Every which way but lose

Instead he has sought out legal advice from a top Queen’s Counsel in London to find a way out of the stalemate, a move that has drawn stinging criticism from both sides of the political divide, including former premier Mahathir Mohamad (www.chedet.com).

Said Mahathir, who still wields significant influence in Umno: “If the decision of the Speaker can be considered a crime, then what will happen when the Parliamentary Speaker suspends opposition members for whatever reasons?

“And this happens frequently. Will opposition members lodge police reports? If they can, then can we consider the police to have powers over the Parliamentary Speaker?”

Said Nga, who is also Taiping MP: “This also shows that Perak Umno does not understand that Malaysian constitutional law is to be interpreted by Malaysians.”

“This is done under the doctrine of constitutional supremacy and not parliamentary supremacy as practised by the United Kingdom.”

No comments:

Post a Comment