Perak Assembly calls for dissolution, polls (updated)

IPOH: The emergency sitting of the Perak State Assembly passed three motions Tuesday, including one calling for the dissolution of the assembly to pave the way for fresh state elections. The sitting was held under a tree in a vacant lot about 200m from the state secretariat building after Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen were barred from entering the building, under what former mentri besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin has described as the “doctrine of necessity.” Nizar said three motions were passed: First, a motion of confidence in himself as the legal Perak mentri besar; second, an agreement to seek Royal consent for the dissolution of the state assembly; and third, the adoption of the suspension of Perak Mentri Besar Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and six executive councillors he appointed. The first motion was proposed by Teja assemblyman Chang Lih Kang while the second was proposed by Titi Serong assemblyman Dr Khalil Idham Lim Abdullah. All three motions were agreed to unanimously by the Pakatan assemblymen who attended the sitting. The emergency sitting was called by State Assembly Speaker V. Sivakumar, saying he was invoking Standing Orders 8 and 11 so that the assembly could vote on two motions. Dr Zambry had earlier described the emergency sitting as “invalid and unlawful” because it had not received the consent of Sultan Azlan Shah. “He (Sivakumar) has used his powers unfairly to achieve his own political agenda and he had ridiculed the proceedings of the House,” he said. Pakatan lawyers say the Ruler’s consent was only needed to summon a sitting by way of royal proclamation if the assembly had been dissolved or prorogued (adjourned by royal prerogative). But because the last sitting was adjourned, the assembly could carry on its usual business in an emergency session. Push and shove Police and Federal Reserve Unit personnel had set up roadblocks and barred the main entrance of the state secretariat building early Tuesday morning in an attempt to block the proceedings. The building houses the offices of the mentri besar, state secretary and the state legislative assembly. Supporters of both Pakatan and Barisan Nasional had initially gathered peacefully, but when the Pakatan assemblymen, led by Nizar, arrived at about 9:45am, Barisan supporters lined up to deny them entry. There was some pushing and shoving. Ipoh OCPD ACP Azisman Alias issued a warning that anyone, including elected representatives, who refused to disperse would be arrested. Police told Nizar and the assemblymen that they were not allowed in, but said Sivakumar could enter. Instead, the Speaker declined and attired in his official garb, convened the emergency sitting in the vacant lot nearby. Snap polls Pakatan, which took over the state after the 12th general election last March, has been trying to call for new state elections after it begin to see its rule slipping away earlier this year. The crisis began on Jan 25 when Bota assemblyman Datuk Nasarudin Hashim resigned from Umno to join Pakatan component party PKR, which led to rumours of many more cross-overs to and from both sides of the political divide. The crisis deepened after Behrang assemblyman Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi and Changkat Jering assemblyman Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu, both from PKR and both facing corruption charges, went “missing” for a few days, only to resurface after a few days to announce they were quitting their party. At the same time, Jelapang assemblyman Hee Yit Foong announced she was quitting DAP, another Pakatan component party. All three declared they would remain independent but pledged their support for Barisan. At the time, Sivakumar said that he had received letters from the three reps saying they were also vacating their seats, but the Election Commission decided that the resignation letters were not valid as they were undated and that there was no need for by-elections in their constituencies. To add salt to Pakatan’s wound, Nasarudin announced he was switching back to Umno after fewer than 10 days as a PKR man. With that, both Barisan and Pakatan held 28 seats each in the state assembly, but the three independents’ pledge of support to Barisan tipped the balance enough for Sultan Azlan Shah to declare Barisan as having the support of the majority and he refused Nizar’s request for the state assembly to be dissolved and snap elections be called. Court battles The tussle will also play out in the courts, with Nizar having filed an application for a judicial review to challenge the legitimacy of Dr Zambry as Perak mentri besar. The case will be heard on Tuesday before High Court (Special Powers and Appellate) Court judge Lau Bee Lan, six days after Judicial Commissioner Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof recused himself from hearing the suit. In his application for a judicial review, Nizar is seeking an interpretation of the Perak state constitution on whether the mentri besar’s post can be vacated in a situation whereby: * THE mentri besar had advised the ruler on the dissolution of the state legislative assembly; * THERE is no dissolution of the assembly; * THERE was no motion of confidence performed against him at the state legislative assembly; * THERE was no resignation made by him. He is also seeking a declaration that he is the legal mentri besar of Perak and asking for an injunction to stop Zambry from carrying out the duties and functions of the mentri besar; and also punitive, aggravated and exemplary damages and costs. On Monday, Perak executive councillor Mohd Zahir Abdul Khalid served an originating summons on behalf of the three independent reps -- Jamaluddin, Mohd Osman and Hee -- seeking a court declaration that they were still elected representatives of their constituencies. The three were challenging the Speaker’s decision that they had resigned and that their seats were vacant. This case will be heard on Thursday. Meanwhile, Dr Zambry has sought a court declaration to make illegal Sivakumar’s suspension of him and his six exco members. This case will also be heard on Tuesday morning. Dr Zambry said he was seeking a declaration that Sivakumar’s decision was unconstitutional and ultra vires the state constitution. He sought declarations that he and his exco members had the right to attend sittings and that the House was not to be bound by any rules by, or instructions from, the Speaker.