Apathy of the majority?

The Apathy of the MajorityRaja Petra in his recent 'No Holds Barred' column commented on the apathy of Perakians in the standoff against the authorities concerning Perak’s Constitutional Crisis.
He said that if protesters could come all the way from Kelantan and Kuala Lumpur, Perakians have no excuse not to be there.I wholly concur with RPK.The few I called to join in the protest had ready- made excuses why they could not. I wasn’t surprised; just angry.But this is nothing new about Malaysians in general. We have a ‘not in my backyard’ attitude on everything from the location of incinerators and telephone relay discs, to human rights abuse and even the simple matter of littering – as long as it is ‘not in my backyard’ and does not affect me directly, it does not concern me. Ergo, I do nothing about it – let someone else protest.What is wrong with Malaysians? Is it because of our feudal mentality that we don’t challenge our government? Is it cowardice? Or selfishness? Or are we too busy ‘cari makan’ that we cannot spare a little time to protest against any injustices.
Go to Indonesia and you can engage the-man- on-the-street in political discussions and you will be surprised how clued on he is . . . and how prepared he is to defend his rights.Koreans would have demanded that their prime minister step down in the same situation that our prime minister is in. They would never accept a prime minister with the kind of question marks hanging over ours.And it must be said, a Korean politician in office would probably have resigned or stepped down until the matter is resolved. They have a tradition of honour which our politicians lack. The same code of honour binds the Japanese and British.The Thais would never countenance the kind of power-grab that BN is guilty of. Nor would they expect interference from their monarch in the politics of the state like what the ......... of Perak has done.In Malaysia we are only just seeing signs of political activism by the populace. But still it’s largely centered in the Klang Valley and to a lesser degree in Penang.
And it must be said, it’s always the same people who storm the Bastille so to speak. Where are the others?While this is generally a Malaysian malaise; on the matter of the Perak Constitutional Crisis Perakians should be ashamed of themselves for their apathy. Do we expect the Kelantanese, Penangites or KLites to fight our battle? In a way it’s their battle too it must be said, but it is foremost our battle.
No one is asking Perakians to break the law but at least if they had turned up in numbers and stood silently in the prescribed mourning black, it would have sent a powerful message to the powers-that-be.This is not a matter of taking sides – it’s not a case of PR vs BN.
This is a matter of the rape of our Constitution. It should concern all Perakians whichever side of the political divide they are on. This is a case of the 'rakyat' having the final say in who they want to govern their state. Not who the .... wants? And if that cannot be resolved in the State Assembly then we should go back to the ballot box.Sometimes we have to act, because silence only encourages the tormentor. If we don’t speak up when others are being unfairly persecuted our turn will come and who will speak up for us then?
To paraphrase Dr Martin Luther King - the greatest sin is not perpetrated by those who have destroyed the Constitution or who have used force against peaceful protests, but the vast majority who have sat idly by.
Yin Ee Kiong A Proud Perakian

Court Rules, FRU Mobilize

After Kuala Lumpur High Court declared Nizar as the legitimate MB of Perak the Police and FRU started to mobilize to SUK Perak at 5.30 pm.

The FRU vehicles rushed to SUK Perak with loud siren with their personnel’s in wearing riot helmet with batons patrolled the street.

Also seen some of the Special Branch Officer stood at DAP Perak and as well as the side street.

Once again the roads are being partially closed and expect to close fully by today night.

Reported by : P.Sugumaran (Political Sec for YB M.Kula Segaran)

Perintah mahkamah tidak sah - Karpal

UTUSAN MALAYSIA NEWS:-

IPOH 8 Mei - Pengerusi DAP, Karpal Singh mendakwa perintah mahkamah yang diperoleh polis untuk melarang sesiapa menghampiri 500 meter dari Bangunan Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri (SUK) semasa sidang Dewan Undangan Negeri (DUN) Perak berlangsung semalam adalah tidak sah.

Beliau mendakwa, perintah mengikut Seksyen 98 Kanun Acara Jenayah itu bukan sahaja dibuat atas pertimbangan politik malah atas arahan parti politik.

''Notis yang ditampal oleh polis di seluruh bandar raya ini juga merupakan salinan permohonan dan bukannya perintah dari Mahkamah Majistret dan dengan itu keseluruhan proses ini tidak sah,'' katanya kepada pemberita di Mahkamah Tinggi Ipoh di sini hari ini.

Menurut Karpal, sekiranya perintah itu ditarik balik, tindakan polis menahan 69 individu termasuk pemimpin pembangkang semalam juga tidak sah dan mereka tidak boleh didakwa di mahkamah.

''Mereka juga boleh mengambil tindakan undang-undang menyaman polis kerana menahan mereka secara tidak sah,'' katanya.

Mahkamah sepatutnya mendengar dan membuat keputusan berhubung permohonan Setiausaha Politik Ahli Parlimen Ipoh Barat, P. Sugumaran yang turut ditahan mengikut Seksyen 98 Kanun Acara Jenayah semalam.

Bagaimanapun, Karpal yang mewakili Sugumaran menarik balik permohonan itu hari ini kerana ingin memfailkan permohonan baru yang lebih teratur dan mengikut prosiding.

Karpal memberitahu, permohonan semalam tidak lengkap dan tidak teratur kerana dibuat secara tergesa-gesa.
Namun kata beliau, pihaknya mempunyai masa untuk memfailkan permohonan baru yang lengkap dengan afidavit sokongan kerana sidang DUN telah ditangguhkan.

''Permohonan baru akan difailkan seberapa cepat yang boleh, seawal-awalnya Isnin ini,'' katanya.

Battleground Ipoh; No explanation, arrest him first

The Star

9:00am Police detain P. Sugumaran, political secretary to Ipoh Barat Member of Parliament M. Kulasegaran, for trying to force his way through the barricades surrounding the state secretariat building. To read more click here.

Malaysianinsider.com

At 9.50am, Ipoh Timur MP Lim Kit Siang and Ipoh Barat MP M. Kulasegaran were stopped by the police and asked to drive away. Both MPs and Kulasegaran's political secretary P. Sugumaran got out of the car and began arguing with the officers.

"I received an official invitation from the Speaker... I have a right to be here. This is my constituency," Kulasegaran argued.

A shouting match began between Sugumaran and the police. It finally ended when Sugumaran was arrested. Both Lim and Kulasegaran then decided to leave. To read more click here.

DAP's Ipoh Timor member of parliament Lim Kit Siang, under whose area the state secretariat is located, is turned away from the building. Also with Lim are DAP's MPs for Ipoh Barat M Kulasegaran and Teluk Intan MP M Manogaran.

The three MPs had official invitations to attend the sitting from assembly speaker.

In an ensuing shouting match with the police, Kulasegaran's aide was arrested.

Cops get court injunction against tomorrow's gathering

Police have today obtained a court injunction which will empower them to arrest on sight any member of the public seen within the vicinity of Perak state secretariat building.

The court injunction bars all supporters of political parties from gathering within 500 meters of the building, where the controversial state assembly sitting will be held tomorrow.

Supporters from both Pakatan Rakyat and Barisan Nasional are expected to turn up to support their respective sides in the on-going power struggle to control the state.

Constitutional Crisis

Last night we had a Ceramah at the Chin Woo hall. Many DAP leaders spoke and was also attended by the legitimate MB of Perak DS Nizar.

I spoke on a number of issues among which are:

1) We need a political solution to the Perak Constitutional crisis and the courts are not the best avenues to sort out this uncertainty

It is my personal opinion that to seek redress to the present constitutional stands still its best to sort it without any involvement of the Malaysian courts. The way the cases are been heard at the Federal Court now arouses a lot of uneasiness among the people. Why preference was given to the Perak constitutional cases in the first place?

How come that there are thousands of cases which has been pending for years and the courts are unable to dispose it due to work load. Backlog of case is the order of the day in most courts and the Federal Court is no exception. Now why the urgency is just mind boggling! May be its not unreasonable to request about reinstating the right to appeal to the Privy Council. Some the local courts are perceived as unable to dish out.

I have spoken at length in Parliament on the necessity to appoint Judges of integrity, honesty and above all free of any political inclinations during the Judicial Appointment Commission bill. I even suggested the formation of a Constitutional Court. But actually even if we have a constitutional court how independent are the Judges of the executive?

2) One Malaysia concept of Najib just a myth.

When one notices the recent appointment of Ministers by Najib we can ascertain that important and powerful portfolios are held by UMNO chaps. The Ministries that I am talking about are the Finance, Home, Foreign and the Defence Ministry. The only exceptional time when MCA President Tun Tan Siew Sen held the Finance Ministry for over 10 years. The Barisan National has 14 component parties. All the other component parties except UMNO are just minor parties in the coalition without any real say in the running of the government.

Did Najib when announcing the new cabinet really put into effect his new concept of One Malaysia? If he had he should have at least appointed a Chinese and an Indian as Deputy Prime Ministers. His failure clearly shows that the slogan of one Malaysia is all talk and no action. Najib announced the one Malaysia concept just to win the hearts and minds of the non-Malays. I doubt the One Malaysia concept can achieve this.

Ridwan recuses from Perak Speaker suits

IPOH, March 24 - Judicial Commissioner Ridwan Ibrahim, a junior judge in Perak, has now recused himself from the two cases related to the Perak political crisis.It comes on the back of yesterday's Federal Court decision to return the suit filed by three former Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen against Speaker V. Sivakumar to the Ipoh High Court, reflecting the controversy over his judgments.

Hee Yit Foong, Osman Jailu and Jamaluddin Radzi, who are now independents supporting Barisan Nasional (BN), are challenging Sivakumar's claim that they resigned from their seats.Ridwan is also recusing himself from Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Abd Kadir and his six executive councillors' suit challenging the 12 to 18-month suspensions by Sivakumar for "unconstitutionally" accepting their appointments.

Sivakumar's lawyer Chan Kok Keong said Ridwan had announced his decision after meeting representatives from Sivakumar and the BN assemblymen's legal teams in his chambers.He said that in view of the Federal Court decision, the cases will now be heard before Judicial Commissioner Wan Afrah Wan Ibrahim.Ridwan had initially allowed the BN lawyer's application to refer the suit to the Federal Court despite Sivakumar's legal team that the state constitution had been used wrongly in the application.

The apex court's ruling effectively means Ridwan had interpreted the law wrongly.The case of the state exco against the speaker will be mentioned in Wan Afrah's court later today.The decision to allow Ridwan to hear the cases had already raised eyebrows given his junior status.

Malaysian Insider.

Picked from Ipoh Echo - An interview with Augustine Anthony

In an attempt to get an insight into the political quagmire that Perak has unwittingly found itself, Ipoh Echo will endeavour to find answers from both sides of the political divide. The series starts with an interview with Augustine Anthony, a prominent human rights lawyer....

UNRAVELLING THE TRUTH BEHIND THE POLITICAL MESS IN PERAK

Ipoh Echo: Perakians in general are rather in the dark as to events clouding the Perak political landscape. How did events unfold?

Augustine: It’s common knowledge, judging from the sequence of events inthe past month, what took place. It all started with the appointment of Dato’ Dr Zambry, replacing Dato’ Seri Nizar Jamaluddin as the Mentri Besar on February 6. Beyond the legal aspects, it’s the feelings of the people that matter.

Perak has been under Barisan Nasional since 1957. There was never an occasion when the state government was ruled by another party other than BN. After the March 8 General Election, the rakyat had voted in a new government under the tripartite coalition named Pakatan Rakyat.

Ipoh Echo. What events have left a lasting impression on Perakians?

Augustine: The openness of the PR-led Government is something new to Perakians. The PR politicians are very approachable and are willing listeners. Long standing issues relating to Orang Asli’s land rights, for example, have been resolved. Land titles, which were once a taboo subject, were given out. A two-way communication was established with those in authority and the common folk. Suddenly, this channel of communication was snuffed out when a “power grab” took place.

The rakyat don’t mind a change in the government but it’s the manner the change is instituted that left many unhappy. They voted for the parties that could bring about changes and now they are left in the lurch.

Ipoh Echo: How had the actions of the three BN-friendly assemblymen impacted the rakyat?
Augustine: The people felt that the three individuals had betrayed their trust.

The response from the rakyat was something unexpected. There had never been such an outpouring of anger in the streets. It translated into a phenomenal scene with people protesting against the swearing-in of the new MB in Kuala Kangsar. The spontaneity of this unplanned protest goes to show how unhappy the people are.

Ipoh Echo: What are the other contributing factors?

Augustine: Power grab is not something easy because we are a country with a written constitution, which has evolved over the years. Besides the Federal Constitution, individual states have their own constitutions. The civil society of the country believes that the Rule of Law must prevail.

There is separation of powers between the Judiciary, the Legislative and the Executive. The three branches must work harmoniously but independently without any form of “unholy interference”. We have been jolted in the past. The Executive assault on the Judiciary in 1988 is a case in point and we have never recovered since. What happened in Perak is another round of Executive meddling in the affairs of a legislative body.

Ipoh Echo: Can this outpouring of anger be averted?

Augustine: Yes, it can. When one party seeks legitimacy to rule why is it so difficult to ask the people for their consent? Seek the mandate from the rakyat. Let the public choose the government of their choice through the ballot boxes.

Ipoh Echo: The rakyat have inferred that there is interference by the Judiciary insofar as the Perak situation is concerned. Your comments.

Augustine: The good governance of the state is enhanced by the independence of the three branches – Judiciary, Legislative and Executive. The people perceive that the Judiciary is imposing itself on the Legislative. The slew of litigations taken against and for the newly-formed BN government is the result of this shortcoming.

Ipoh Echo: There is a general feeling among Perakians that truth will be suppressed. Your comments.

Augustine: With the developments taking place presently, I don’t think that’s easy. The monarchy has been unwittingly dragged into the fray. It’s not about defending the Institution of the Rulers per se. It’s about defending the interest of certain individuals. We no longer live in the 50s and 60s where the flow of information was so restricted. With Internet people today can access news as it unfolds. Blogs and online newspapers provide better and wider coverage than the mainstream media do. The people can differentiate between truth and fiction. Truth, therefore, will never be suppressed.

Ipoh Echo: What is the effect of this mess on the rakyat?

Augustine: One positive development that have taken place is that the rakyat today are better informed than before. They now know what is enshrined in the Perak State Constitution and what the Perak State Legislative Standing Order provides. They have taken cognisance of the fact that federal apparatchiks, like the police and the anti-corruption commission, are being brought to bear on the Opposition. And foremost, they all know who the underdogs are.

Ipoh Echo: Do you think that this impasse will end on a happy note? What are the lessons learnt?

Augustine: I cannot predict that it will end on a happy note. However, I can say this for certain that those involved in the “power grab” thought that it was a walk in the park. Now they know that the Constitution has enough provisions to protect the man in the street.

Any setback is good education for the people to be vigilant, prudent, compassionate and circumspect. It will teach future generations how to respect the Constitution, the Rule of Law and the people. It will also teach those in power that they cannot disregard the feelings of the masses. They must acknowledge the fact that their number is small while the masses are huge.

Ipoh Echo: How can this crisis be resolved?

Augustine: Dissolve the state assembly and call for a fresh election. Let Perakians decide what’s best for their state. Otherwise it’s denying their legitimate expectations.

Further Damages

"As the voters became tired of the bad news coming out on Democracy Plaque under the Pakatan Raintree, it began to wish Pakatan Perak to stand tall again."

Further Damaged Democracy Plaque

The Speaker can have his own lawyers

Today the court of appeal ruled that the Perak Speaker V.Sivakumar can have his own private lawyers to represent him in 2 pending suits related to Perak Crisis.

The court also ruled that there was no provision that the Speaker had to be represented by the state legal adviser as ruled by Ipoh High Court judicial commissioner Ridwan Ibrahim.

The decision of the three-member bench led by Justice Md Raus Sharif was unanimous. The other two judges were Justice R Abdull Hamid Embong and Justice Ahmad Maarop.

Yes, JC's term extended, but questions remain

Picked From Malaysian Insider

By Debra Chong

KUALA LUMPUR, Mar 11 - Ridwan Ibrahim, whose term as a judicial commissioner (JC) in the Ipoh High Court became the subject of much public debate in the ongoing Perak constitutional crisis, has had his contract extended for another two years.

"Yes, it has been renewed. Effective 1st March," de facto Law Minister Datuk Seri Nazri Abdul Aziz confirmed the news today.

Nazri told The Malaysian Insider that Ridwan's two-year term as a JC expired last February 28, but a renewal letter signed by the Chief Justice of Malaya, Tan Sri Zaki Azmi, has effectively extended the controversial judge's term.

He explained the renewal of a JC does not require the involvement of the Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC), the newly-minted body regulating the appointment of judges.

Asked when the letter was sent out, Nazri said he could not remember, but added it did not matter because the renewal can be backdated.

Ridwan recently made several controversial rulings in the Ipoh High Court, the most notable being an order stopping Perak Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar from holding "any unlawful assembly."

He also ordered Sivakumar to only use the services of State Legal Advisor (SLA), Datuk Ahmad Kamal Md Shahid, to represent him in another case where three elected representatives are suing him for declaring their state seats vacant.

But the constitutional wrangle has become more muddled with Sivakumar suing the SLA in a separate suit filed in the KL High Court yesterday.

For federal lawmaker M. Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh-Barat), the real question to be answered concerns the accountability of a JC compared to a judge with full tenure.

"How can a trainee judge be allowed to decide a constitutional matter of such monumental significance which concerns the public?" he asked.

"By right the case should be heard by an experienced judge," added Kulasegaran, a lawyer by training.

Kulasegaran explained a JC is a judge-in-training who is put on a two-year probation period, at the end of which he is usually confirmed, relieved of his duties or chooses not to continue as a judge, such as Raja Aziz Addruse, a notable lawyer who was a former Bar Council president.

He noted that JC Ridwan had added to the complexity of the issue when he made the decision barring Speaker Sivakumar from chairing "unlawful" assemblies in chambers instead of in open court where the public can follow the arguments of the lawyers from both sides.

"Justice must be seen to be done," Kulasegaran emphasised.

Speaker received the restraining order

Perak legislative assembly speaker V Sivakumar was today served with a court order restraining him from holding any unlawful assembly meetings.

The order was issued by Ipoh High Court judicial commissioner Ridwan Ibrahim.

The order in full reads:"It is hereby ordered that the 1st defendant, YB Encik V Sivakumar is restraint from convening any unlawful meetings purporting it to be a meeting of the Perak state legislative assembly."

Press Statement by Tommy Thomas for the speaker of Perak

IPOH HIGH COURT SAMAN PEMULA NO. 24-247-09

DATO’ DR ZAMBRY BIN ABD. KADIR & 6 ANORS

v SIVAKUMAR A/L VARATHARAJU NAIDU & ANOR

Because much public interest has been generated in this matter, it is important that I briefly state for the record what transpired in Chambers before Ridwan Ibrahim, JC this morning.

I was told by the Court interpreter that the Judge wanted only one counsel from each party to attend before him in Chambers. Counsel entered his Chambers at about 9.45 a.m. The Plaintiffs were represented by Mohd Hafarizam Harun. The Deputy State Legal Adviser Zulkifli also appeared in Chambers. I represented the Defendants.

Once in Chambers, I requested that the proceedings be held in Open Court because of the public interest in the matter. The Plaintiffs objected, and the Judge ruled that it should be heard in Chambers. At the outset, Counsel for the Plaintiffs stated that my team, Mr Chan Kok Keong, Mr Philip Koh, Mr Augustine Anthony and Mr Leong Cheok Keng and I had no locus standi to represent the Defendants, namely the Speaker and the Perak State Legislative Asssembly. According to him, only the State Legal Adviser can act for these two Defendants.

The one exception is a fiat granted by the Attorney General and/or the Legal Adviser under Section 24(3) of the Government Proceedings Act 1956. The State Legal Adviser supported this submission. I submitted that the Government Proceedings Act is not applicable on the facts of this case and these proceedings because the Defendants do not come within the Government Proceedings Act as the Speaker is not a “public officer” and the Assembly is not “government” within the meaning of that Act.

I also produced a letter by the Speaker appointing our team as the lawyers for the Defendants. At the end of submissions which lasted about half an hour, the Judge ruled that we have no locus standi to represent the Defendants. I then applied to hold a watching brief, but with speaking rights. The Plaintiffs again objected.

The Court ruled that I could hold the watching brief but could not submit or participate in its proceedings. In consequence of the two rulings, I informed the Judge I did not wish to remain in Chambers, and sought his permission to leave.

The Court recorded that I could withdraw from Chambers, which I did at about 10.20 a.m.

TOMMY THOMAS(12.30 p.m.)Tuesday 3.3.2009

Pakatan Lawyers - No Locus Standi

Kulasegaran had earlier said that it was a conflict of interest that the legal advisor who acted for Zambry in a case last week represented Sivakumar in a case filed by Zambry today."How can he act for both plaintiff and defendant? It's a clear case of conflict," said Kulasegaran.When asked to comment on this, the deputy state legal advisor Zulqarnain said that he was only "looking after the interest of the government"."Our duty as legal advisor is to advise the government," he said before walking away. However, he did not indicate which government he was representing.

Ridwan will next hear an application by three BN-friendly independents - Behrang assemblyperson Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi, Changkat Jering assemblyperson Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu and Jelapang assemblyperson Hee Yit Foong - against Sivakumar for wrongly declaring their seats vacant using their undated resignation letters.

This application will be heard on Thursday.On that day, the judge will also be fixing another date to hear Zambry's and the exco members' application against their suspension.
The matter was adjourned this morning after the court ruled that the speaker could not be represented by private lawyers.

03/03/09 - STATE ASSEMBLY MEETING UNDER THE TREE

Rush Hours- 02/03/09

Pre-emptive strike in Perak

Lawyers representing Perak mentri besar Datuk Dr Zambry Kadir and his executive council will file for an injunction this afternoon at the High Court in Ipoh in an attempt to lift the suspension orders preventing them from attending the state assembly.

Today morning 11.00 am a summons was served on Speaker V Sivakumar and it was received by his political secretar A.Wasu.

The legal action is unprecedented because the courts are not usually allowed to review decisions of the legislature and do not usually have jurisdiction over proceedings of the assembly because of the doctrine of separation of powers.

However, an emergency sitting of the state assembly will be convened tomorrow and Barisan Nasional (BN) are eager to be properly represented because its government could otherwise be voted out of office.

Speaker Office Received The UMNO Lawyer Letters

Today, 10.30am, UMNO lawyer's going to serve Speaker V.Sivakumar a summon in his office in SUK and later going to file an injuction against suspension order at the Ipoh High Court.


10.45 am - All the reporter's were invited to Zamry's office for press conference by his office staff.

10.55 am - All reporters came back to Speaker's office.

11.00 am - 3 UMNO lawyer's came to Speaker's office to handed over the letter. The letter was received by his political secretary A.Wasu.

11.05 am - Zahir later told reported that Sivakumar was referred to the committee over his suspension of Menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir and his six executive council members.

"Sivakumar has called for an emergency assembly sitting tomorrow but had not sent out notices of the meeting to Zambry and his exco members. Invitations were also not given to the three defected Pakatan representative, who are now BN-friendly independents"


More news to come later.

Emergency Meeting Of The Perak Assembly

Perak Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar invokes Standing Order 8 and 11 to call for an emergency state assembly on Mar 3 to vote on two motions related to the constitutional crisis in Perak.

The motions are on the vote of confidence on Pakatan Rakyat's ousted menteri besar Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin as well as the no confidence motion on Barisan Nasional’s menteri Besar Zambry Abdul Kadir.

He has instructed that notices be sent to all state representatives to attend except suspended Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Zambry Kadir and his six executive councillors and the three Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen who quit their party to become Barisan Nasional friendly Independents.

Press Statement

Emergency Meeting of The State Legislative Assembly of Perak D.R.

on 3^rd March 2009

On 06.02.2009 I have written to HRH Sultan Azlan Shah, seeking HRH agreement to convene a meeting of the State Legislative Assembly the soonest it may be convened for the Assembly to determine and resolve who amongst the members of the State Legislative Assembly of Perak commands the confidence of the majority of members and qualifies to be appointed as the Menteri Besar of Perak.

In the said letter I have also requested HRH for the occasion of the swearing in of YB Dato Zambry Bin Abdul Kadir as the new Menteri Besar of Perak be adjourned to a date after the said meeting of the State Legislative Assembly of Perak.

It is now common knowledge that the events on the 06.02.2009 had overtaken the contents and relevance of my letter dated 06.02.2009 to HRH Sultan Azlan Shah.

I am now in receipt of two Notices of Motion dated 24.02.2009, which are proposed to be moved in the State Legislative Assembly of Perak with such requests that the need under Standing Order 27(3) of Standing Orders of the State Legislative Assembly of Perak (SOSLAP) be dispensed with.

As the State Legislative Assembly of Perak now remains in it’s 1^st session after being constituted and having considered the dispensation of Standing Order 27(3) SOSLAP with powers of such dispensation provided for under Standing Order 8 SOSLAP in matters of emergency, I wish to inform that the State Legislative Assembly of Perak will convene an emergency meeting on the 3^rd day of March 2009.

Dated 27.02.2009

YB V. Sivakumar

Speaker

State Legislative Assembly of Perak D.R.

Constitutional Monarchy Rule of Law

You will find a signature on the top left hand corner of this article (1st page). The signature is non other then of Sultan Azlan Shah who did so for a friend of mine.

The irony is many of what is written in the article has not been fully practiced!

God bless writers!

To download the article click at the given link http://www.megaupload.com/?d=TV2GH515