|In the latest twist to the political saga in Perak,
state ruler Sultan Azlan Shah was accused of not
citing any provisions under the state constitution
when ordering Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin to resign as
revealed in an affidavit filed by the ousted
menteri besar with the Kuala Lumpur High Court
The Pakatan Rakyat leader gave a detailed
account of what had transpired at the crucial
meeting with the ruler on Feb 4 and 5.
Mohd Nizar also denied and questioned the version
stated by Perak legal advisor Ahmad Kamal
Md Shahid in his affidavit. According to him,
Ahmad Kamal’s version did not constitute the whole truth.
In his affidavit to support the affidavit by
Barisan Nasional’s newly installed menteri besar
Zambry Abdul Kadir, Ahmad Kamal noted that
the ruler had cited the constitution when
ordering the ousted menteri besar to resign.
Mohd Nizar also revealed that during his
15-minute audience with the Sultan on Feb 5,
he had warned the ruler of the possible
consequences he could face in failing to dissolve
the state assembly.
According to the affidavit, Mohd Nizar said
the ordeal began on Feb 4, when he met
the ruler to seek his permission to dissolve
the assembly to end the deadlock following
the sudden disappearance of three assemblypersons
– Mohd Osman Jailu (Changkat Jering),
Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and
Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) – who had “resigned”.
However, the sultan told Mohd Nizar that he
would think about the request and recited a
passage from the Quran
“Innallaha maa Sobirin”
(God is with the person who is patient).
Mohd Nizar said he respected the decision
and during the meeting, he also submitted a
draft for the dissolution of the assembly for
the ruler’s approval.
However, the ousted menteri besar denied
making any suggestion to the ruler that the
assembly had lost confidence in him as the
leader of the executive and for that reason,
he wanted the dissolution of the assembly.
Several reasons cited
On Feb 13,
Mohd Nizar filed an application for a judicial review,
in challenging Zambry’s appointment and sought
several declarations pertaining to the interpretation
of Article 16 (6) of the Perak Constitution.
In his application, Mohd Nizar claimed to be
the rightful chief executive of the state on
the grounds that there was no dissolution of
the state legislature, no motion of no-confidence
was taken in the House against him and he did not
resign from the post.
He also issued a writ of quo warranto asking Zambry
to show cause by what authority he was occupying
the post of menteri besar.
Mohd Nizar said in his affidavit that the sultan had
informed him on Feb 5 that he was not acceding to
the request to dissolve the assembly.
The ousted menteri besar then requested for another
15-minute audience with the ruler and proceeded to
list out several reasons as to why the assembly
should be dissolved. These include:
1) He was applying for
the dissolution of the assembly based on his power
as the menteri besar.
2) Power should be returned to the people to choose
a lawful government.
3) If the assembly was dissolved, the people would
respect and improve and uplift the image of the royal
institution and they would also be thankful. This will
show that the sultan is just and non-partisan in letting
the people to decide. This was in accordance with the
concept of constitutional monarchy, and the democracy
principles that the state upholds.
4) The sultan should be thankful and accept God’s gift
in allowing him to celebrate his silver jubilee and to return
the peoples’ right to choose their own government.
5) Should the ruler not grant the dissolution, the people
would blame the palace and the sultan himself.
6) Where was BN’s morality in accepting Jamaluddin,
Mohd Osman and Hee, with two of them facing corruption
charges. What if Jamaluddin and Mohd Osman are found
guilty of corruption, what would happen next? If the
charges are withdrawn, the people would feel that it
was based on intervention by the palace or BN.
7) If the assembly is dissolved, the royalty and the palace
would be respected in the eyes of the public and international community. The question of immunity of the rulers as
brought about by (former premier) Dr Mahathir Mohamad
would also be negated.
8) Mohd Nizar cited a passage from Sultan Azlan Shah’s
book titled ‘Constitutional Monarchy, the Rule of Law
and Good Governance‘ which had been given to him
by the ruler on his appointment as menteri besar. The passage
stated: “Under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted
that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would not withhold his
consent to a request for the dissolution of the Parliament.
His role is purely formal.”
9) He also reminded the ruler of what happened in
countries like Indonesia, Philippines, Egypt and Iran
which once had a monarchy. However, once the monarchy
reneged and sided with a political party, it resulted in
Refused to resign
Mohd Nizar said he also told the sultan that during his
silver jubilee celebrations, the latter had emphasised
on good governance and pleaded with the ruler to
uphold it by dissolving the assembly.
He also reminded the ruler of the statutory letter signed
by the 31 Pakatan elected assemblypersons in support
of him being menteri besar which was ordered by the palace.
Following this, Mohd Nizar said: “The sultan slowly raised
his face and said he would not order the dissolution and
instead called for my resignation.”
Refusing to do so, the ousted menteri besar then replied:
“Ampun Tuanku, patik pohon sembah derhaka”
(Forgive me your highness, I humbly beg to disagree).
He then kissed the hand of the ruler, who left the room
without uttering a word.
In a related development, the sultan’s private secretary
Colonel Abdul Rahim Mohd Noor had also filed an affidavit
on April 8.
He stated that
while Mohd Nizar informed the sultan of
the resignations of Mohd Osman, Jamaluddin
and Hee, he had received letters from the trio
on the same day, disputing this.
On Feb 4, Abdul Rahim received letters from the three
claiming they had lost their confidence in Mohd Nizar and
indicating that they would leave the party to become
independents but support BN.
At about the same time, he also received a letter signed
by 27 BN elected representatives that they had also lost
their confidence in Mohd Nizar and that BN now commanded
the majority in the House.
The case has been slated for hearing at the Kuala Lumpur
High Court on Thursday.