The on-going unsavoury shenanigans in Perak where a constitutionally instituted government is thwarted from tabling its business at the State assembly calls into question the role of the speaker in a legislative set-up. in malaysia, as elsewhere in the Commonwealth which adopts the Westminster model, the Speaker of an assembly/parliament assumes his position by virtue of his election to the legislature as a MP or State assemblyman. this clearly implies that the assumption of office as a speaker is contingent upon his election on a party ticket. In such a setup, it would be silly if not laughable to expect the speaker to conduct proceedings in a non-partisan manner seeing that his very presence in the august chambers is due to the umblical cord provided by his party. To put it simply, toe the party line and push the partisan interests of the party or else get dumped from the candidate's list in the next elctions. So the poor speaker is a prisoner of a dilemma : interpret the rules fairly even against party interests and be kicked out or bend with the wind and protect the periuk nasi.
Even worse, when the Speaker aggrandises himself to a mythical mock-heroic stature and holds a whole state to ransom as what is currently unfolding in the Perak legislature where the interests and wishes of the legitimately constituted government are thwarted a Speaker who realises that his periuk nasi is about to be flushed down the toilet bowl. Talk about conflict of interest!! + Dont hoodwink the hoi polloi by claiming that all this is being done to uphold the constitution, it stinks!
The Americans, having long realised this hogwash, have long done away with such a sham but the British being British stubbornly stick to tradition and the end result are accusations of bias, imputations of partisanship and allegations of unfairness. So what gives? The logical thing to do is to re-examine the appointment process as provided in the Constitution and amend it by providing for the :
1.Election of a non-partisan speaker who is a non-elected assemblyman. Someone from civil society, a retired judge, a respected ex-councillor a reputable NGO activist etc.(the list of potential candidates is endless)
2. If for nostalgia, the old status quo is to be preserved then all by means include a caveat that the tenure of the speaker automatically ceases to be when his party falls from power in the mid-term of a legislature.
The above will put a stop to a Little Tin Can Napoleon from metamorphising into the Tyraniccal Warlord lording over his periuk nasi and cup of toddy and if some smart arse idiot of a wakil or human rights advocate questions the constitutional probity of it all, just politely tell him/her to shove his/her intellectual shit back up his/her arse while using his brains to think about the justice /fairness of it all. They deserve it for it merely confirms that :
a. they are in the legal business for the moolah
b. they are so stupid that they do not understand constitutional nuances, let alone simple English.
c. their poor upbringing has neutered their conscience for good and they do not care the rights/wrongs of their brainless actions
d. they are the sidekicks of Bullshit if not his master or they may be Bullshits themselves..hahahaha
The shame in Perak is primarily due to samsengs who are loath to relinquish power even if they no longer have the mandate to govern.If nothing is done to rectify such constitutional anomalies, we are on the slippery road to chaos.
Even worse, when the Speaker aggrandises himself to a mythical mock-heroic stature and holds a whole state to ransom as what is currently unfolding in the Perak legislature where the interests and wishes of the legitimately constituted government are thwarted a Speaker who realises that his periuk nasi is about to be flushed down the toilet bowl. Talk about conflict of interest!! + Dont hoodwink the hoi polloi by claiming that all this is being done to uphold the constitution, it stinks!
The Americans, having long realised this hogwash, have long done away with such a sham but the British being British stubbornly stick to tradition and the end result are accusations of bias, imputations of partisanship and allegations of unfairness. So what gives? The logical thing to do is to re-examine the appointment process as provided in the Constitution and amend it by providing for the :
1.Election of a non-partisan speaker who is a non-elected assemblyman. Someone from civil society, a retired judge, a respected ex-councillor a reputable NGO activist etc.(the list of potential candidates is endless)
2. If for nostalgia, the old status quo is to be preserved then all by means include a caveat that the tenure of the speaker automatically ceases to be when his party falls from power in the mid-term of a legislature.
The above will put a stop to a Little Tin Can Napoleon from metamorphising into the Tyraniccal Warlord lording over his periuk nasi and cup of toddy and if some smart arse idiot of a wakil or human rights advocate questions the constitutional probity of it all, just politely tell him/her to shove his/her intellectual shit back up his/her arse while using his brains to think about the justice /fairness of it all. They deserve it for it merely confirms that :
a. they are in the legal business for the moolah
b. they are so stupid that they do not understand constitutional nuances, let alone simple English.
c. their poor upbringing has neutered their conscience for good and they do not care the rights/wrongs of their brainless actions
d. they are the sidekicks of Bullshit if not his master or they may be Bullshits themselves..hahahaha
The shame in Perak is primarily due to samsengs who are loath to relinquish power even if they no longer have the mandate to govern.If nothing is done to rectify such constitutional anomalies, we are on the slippery road to chaos.
LET PERAK BE THE FIRST AND LAST.
Revert: The Government would be better off reviewing the relevant sections of the constitution rather than tinkering with a perfect law like the ISA.
NO TO ISA REVIEW/REPEAL
Revert: The Government would be better off reviewing the relevant sections of the constitution rather than tinkering with a perfect law like the ISA.
NO TO ISA REVIEW/REPEAL
No comments:
Post a Comment