Political undercurrents in Pakatan

He has become a passionate champion of the Opposition and he was in top form as the keynote speaker at the first Pakatan Harapan convention yesterday. His new friends initially had doubts ...

Sunday, 13 November 2016 | MYT 12:00 AM
BY JOCELINE TAN

TUN Dr Mahathir Mohamad looked dashing in red.

He has become a passionate champion of the Opposition and he was in top form as the keynote speaker at the first Pakatan Harapan convention yesterday. His new friends initially had doubts about him. They suspected his agenda and they were unsure whether he had truly cut the Umno umbilical cord.

But he seems to have sunk his heart and soul into the Opposition’s cause of replacing Barisan Nasional going by his keynote address.

Dr Mahathir is pushing very hard for the Opposition to pull together so that there will only be one-to-one contests with Barisan in the general election.

And, as a number of Pakatan leaders at the packed gathering noted, he appeared much more committed to their coalition than Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin.

The day-long convention was supposed to have concluded on a high note with the signing of a cooperation agreement with Parti Pribumi Bersatu Malaysia.

But Muhyiddin, who is Parti Pribumi president, had backed out from signing the agreement, pleading for more time to discuss the arrangement.

He apologised for it when it came to his turn to speak at the convention, stressing several times that his party is committed to working with Pakatan to ensure straight fights in the general election.

“He took the big bang out of the inaugural gathering. It would have been great if the convention ended with a communiqué on the accord with the new party as we approach the general election. That would send a strong message to voters,” said a Pakatan MP.

As a result, the gathering became the usual talking shop, one leader after another saying things everyone had heard before – running down Barisan, making fun of the Prime Minister and his wife, gloating over the shrinking ringgit, mocking the China investments and arguing the need for straight fights.

But the convention was important to show Pakatan supporters that the former prime minister and deputy prime minister are now on their side.

Few people thought they would live to hear Dr Mahathir declare his support for the Reformasi cause but he did that at the end of his keynote address, drawing huge applause. He even wore a “Free Anwar Now” button on his red shirt.

It seems like Muhyiddin is still trying to assess his new political friends. His body language is still quite formal and each time the speakers let out the Reformasi battle cry, he raised his fist to only somewhere near his chest.

It was quite amusing to watch him hold up the “Bebas Anwar” placard that the audience had to hold above their heads when the emcee gave the signal.

On top of that, Muhyiddin had to endure all the top Pakatan leaders declaring that, “Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim is still our choice for Prime Minister”. It was as good as telling Muhyiddin that he is not their choice.

There are undercurrents in Pakatan. It is understood that Muhyiddin’s reluctance to proceed with the cooperation agreement is because he is still talking to PAS.

The sense is that he has been unable to strike a comfort level with DAP. His party is going for Malay seats and having DAP as his ally may backfire.

Muhyiddin is said to be exploring the idea of a separate Opposition coalition comprising Parti Pribumi, PKR and PAS. This will be the grand coalition that has been floated by some leaders. Pakatan is, of course, against the idea.

The grand coalition would find the Chinese-dominated DAP and Amanah in one group and the Malay-dominated parties in another bigger group.

In the event that the grand coalition does capture Putrajaya, the Malay-dominated group will call the shots in the coalition government.

On the sidelines there was chatter among the press corps of tensions between Muhyiddin and his domineering party chairman.

Muhyiddin was not present for Dr Mahathir’s keynote address.

He came later and made a point of sitting next to his deputy president Datuk Seri Mukhriz Mahathir.

But the man to watch in all this shadow play is PKR deputy president Datuk Seri Azmin Ali who side-stepped questions from the media about a second Opposition coalition, saying that negotiations with PAS is still on.

The Selangor Mentri Besar was supposed to have left on an official visit to Mexico yesterday but he decided not to go. Some claimed he wanted to be around for Dr Mahathir at the convention and they did strike a companionable picture as they sat together.

However, Azmin told reporters he cancelled his overseas trip to be there for his mother who has been hospitalised for a stroke and who had to undergo another operation on Friday.

PAS has said that it will work with PKR and Parti Pribumi but draws the line when it comes to Amanah and DAP. The grand coalition sounds implausible for now but it is not impossible.

Muhyiddin’s party has brought hope to the Opposition but he has also made things complicated for them.

http://m.thestar.com.my/story.aspx?hl=Political-undercurrents-in-Pakatan

The principle of Parliamentary privilege

CONFUSION is a chicken with shattered eyes. That’s the Thai proverb buzzing in the mind in the wake of last week’s Parliament ... 

Wednesday, 2 November 2016

BY M. VEERA PANDIYAN

CONFUSION is a chicken with shattered eyes. That’s the Thai proverb buzzing in the mind in the wake of last week’s Parliament proceedings.

Translated, it means being utterly baffled by events happening very quickly.

And based on management guru Tom Peters’ dictum of “If you’re not confused, you’re not paying attention”, I could also be suffering from an acute case of attention deficit disorder.

The confounding issue revolves around Parliamentary privilege and conflicting statements made by the Speaker, several ministers and the Inspector-General of Police over the alleged breaches of official secrecy committed by three ex-ministers in the speeches made during the debate on Budget 2017.

Former deputy prime minister Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin, second finance minister Datuk Seri Husni Hanadzlah, and rural and regional development minister Datuk Seri Shafie Apdal are reportedly under probe for violating the Official Secrets Act (OSA), 1972 for speaking about 1MDB. Deputy Prime Minister and Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi said that the trio could not claim immunity when speaking about matters classified under the OSA in the august House.

Zahid said the Government would leave it to the police to investigate and forward the findings to the Attorney-General.

Parliament Speaker Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia set things in motion on Thursday when he said the former ministers might have breached their oaths by disclosing details about Cabinet meetings in Parliament.

He suggested that they might have even broken the OSA and the Sedition Act with their revelations in the Dewan Rakyat.

Muhyiddin was alleged to have revealed classified information on the company and Shafie had questioned several government decisions over it, while Ahmad Husni had reportedly said the country could still face economic repercussions if the controversial issues surrounding the firm were not properly handled.

After reports were lodged by two NGOs – Jaringan Melayu Malaysia (JMM) and Sahabat N87 Federal Territory – IGP Tan Sri Khalid Abu Bakar said police would record the former ministers’ statements for allegedly revealing confidential information.

The IGP reminded all government officials and those who had left the civil service to be very careful and responsible when making statements as action could be taken against them if they disclosed official secrets or breached oaths of secrecy.

As requested, Ahmad Husni turned up at Bukit Aman on Monday for police to question him and record his statements made in the Dewan Rakyat.

The session, however, was inexplicably postponed.

Hours earlier, current Second Finance Minister Datuk Seri Johari Abdul Ghani added to the muddle by saying that it was not wrong to ask questions in the House.

“There is nothing wrong in asking questions. In Parliament, everybody can ask questions,” he told reporters at the Parliament lobby.

Well, not exactly anyone, but elected Members of Parliament and appointed senators can do so.

They have the privilege to ask and speak in the interest of the people and have immunity from prosecution, except for matters deemed seditious.

The principle of freedom of speech, often described as the most important of all privileges, dates back to the English civil wars during the 1600s when parliamentarians fought for the right to self-governance and independence from the monarchy.

After three wars, the Bill of Rights finally established the powers of parliament and became enshrined in law in 1689.

Article 9 of the Bill of Rights states that “the freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament”.

Our Federal Constitution also clearly affirms this under Article 63 which states:

(1) The validity of any proceedings in either House of Parliament or any committee thereof shall not be questioned in any court.

(2) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything said or any vote given by him when taking part in any proceedings of either House of Parliament or any committee thereof.

(3) No person shall be liable to any proceedings in any court in respect of anything published by or under the authority of either House of Parliament.

However, under two conditional clauses (4 & 5) added through amendments made after the May 13, 1969 riots, the privilege does not apply to any person charged with the Sedition Act 1948 and laws enacted under Article 10 (4) which protect the national language, the special position of the Malays and natives of Sabah and Sarawak and commenting on the position of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and the Malay rulers.

As many of our legal experts have since pointed out, there is no mention of the OSA or oaths of secrecy involved.

If the former ministers had violated any rules, they should rightly be referred to Parliament’s Rights and Privileges Committee, chaired by the Speaker himself.

The rule of law, an intrinsically moral notion, should reign supreme in the administration of Parliament because that is the place where our laws are made.

As it is, we have already fallen sharply in the global rule of law standings.

Malaysia ranks 54 out of 113 countries surveyed in the latest annual Rule of Law Index, a drop of 15 points from last year’s position of 39.

The index, published by the World Justice Project advocacy group, measures how rule of law is perceived, based on nine factors – constraints on government powers, absence of corruption, open government, fundamental rights, order and security, regulatory enforcement, civil justice, criminal justice and customary justice.

The assessment of residents (1,000 respondents per country) and local legal experts also covers the conditions experienced by the population, including the marginalised.

By comparison, Singapore – the only Asian state in the top 10 rankings led by Denmark – holds the ninth place for the second year running.

Media Consultant M. Veera Pandiyan likes this observation by Aristotle:

At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.

• Media Consultant M. Veera Pandiyan likes this observation by Aristotle: At his best, man is the noblest of all animals; separated from law and justice he is the worst.

http://www.thestar.com.my/opinion/columnists/along-the-watchtower/2016/11/02/the-principle-of-parliamentary-privilege-the-rule-of-law-should-reign-supreme-in-the-administration/