Thursday, May 21, 2009

Perbicaraan kes MB Perak Mahkamah Rayuan sedang berlangsung

Dihadapan 3 Hakim Datuk Ahmad Maarop, Datuk Md Raus Sharif dan Zainun Ali.
Peguam Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abd Kadir, Datuk Cecil Abraham.

Abraham noted that on Feb 5, the Ruler met Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak, Barisan Nasional assemblymen and the three independent reps whose resignation from their Pakatan member parties led to the state’s political impasse.

The three independents on that day pledged their loyalty to Barisan, which led the Sultan to determine the coalition had the majority in the 59-seat Assembly.

Abraham also argued that the Sultan can “extraneously, without a vote of no-confidence, ascertain the loss of majority.”

He reiterated the argument he made at the High Court ealier, that under Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution, once the ruler refused Nizar’s request for dissolution, it was clear that “he shall tender the resignation of the Executive Council.”

“There is no express provision that a motion of no-confidence in the State Legislative Assembly is the only way to remove a mentri besar,” he said, adding that “there were other means, such as the interview by the Sultan.”

“Article 16(6) is clear and unambiguous that Nizar should tender his resignation, it doesn’t say he needs to go before an Assembly vote.”

In his submission Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail, acting as intervener in the case, said that under the law, the Perak State Assembly Speaker was only allowed to cast a vote to avoid equality in the House.

Discounting the Speaker, at that juncture, Pakatan had 27 votes and Barisan had 28 votes. “There was no deadlock and without a majority, there can be no dissolution,” he said.

Justice Md Rauf Shariff said the court would only decide on whether Justice Abdul Aziz had intepreted the Perak Constitution rightly or wrongly.

“If he intepreted it correctly, we will dismiss the appeal. If not, we’ll accept the appeal,” he said.

Jam 2.00 ptg.
Mahkamah bersambung bicara. Peguam Nizar, Sulaiman Abdullah mula penghujahannya.

Sulaiman Abdullah, yang mewakili Mohammad Nizar, dalam hujahnya berkata mengikut Perkara 16(6) Perlembagaan Perak, Menteri Besar tidak memegang jawatan atas perkenan Sultan, tetapi berdasarkan keyakinan anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri, yang beliau mempunyai tanggungjawab terhadap mereka.

Oleh yang demikian, Mohammad Nizar tidak boleh dipecat oleh Sultan. Mohammad Nizar hanya boleh dipecat selepas undi tidak percaya diluluskan terhadap beliau oleh anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri, katanya.Sulaiman berkata Hakim Abdul Aziz bertindak betul apabila beliau mengguna pakai keputusan dalam kes bekas Ketua Menteri Sarawak Stephen Kalong Ningkan iaitu satu-satunya cara bagi memecat Mohammad Nizar daripada jawatan ialah melalui undi tidak percaya.

"Oleh itu, kami menyatakan bahawa tidak ada sebab bagi mahkamah ini untuk tidak mengikut dan mengguna pakai kes Ningkan bagi kes kami ini," katanya.

"Sama ada Menteri Besar berkenaan telah tidak lagi mendapat keyakinan majoriti, bukan diputuskan oleh rakyat Perak, dan bukan juga diputuskan oleh Sultan, tapi hanya diputuskan oleh anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri yang dipilih," kata Sulaiman.Sulaiman mengakhiri sesi penghujahan sebelum mahkamah ditangguhkan pukul 5 petang tadi.

Ketika ditemui pemberita selepas perbicaraan itu, Mohammad Nizar berkata: "Tak kiralah apa keputusannya esok, tapi apa yang paling penting ialah sokongan rakyat Perak terhadap saya."Apa yang kami minta ini adalah untuk mereka dan apa yang kami lakukan ini hanyalah untuk mendapatkan keadilan melalui proses mahkamah," katanya

Peguam Negara (AG) Abdul Ghani Patail masih tidak muncul dalam kamar bicara. Yang kelihatan cuma timbalan dan peguam-peguam dari pejabat AG. Keputusan dijangka diketahui ESOK

2 comments:

  1. Hujah yang sama di Mahkamah Tinggi pada 11 Mei lalu. Hakim telah menidakkan perkara ini

    ReplyDelete