You are on page 1of 1

300,000 COPIES DAILY 30 SEN for delivery to your doorstep

Member of Audit Bureau of Circulations (Malaysia)

Award winning newspaper for public service reporting and opinion writing.

No. 4764 PP 2644/12/2009 (023092)

May 22, 2009


Kris shock winner pg21 in ‘Idol’

» Umno quota system may be abolished: Hisham pg2 » Slick Shakhtar prevail in finale pg30


Seized – device that disables car alarm system
SEREMBAN: This device that Negri Sembilan police chief Datuk Osman Salleh is holding is called an electronic signal detector. It was used by a band of car thieves to neutralise a car’s security alarm system. According to Osman, the device is worth RM15,000 and was among several tools seized from a car-theft syndicate active in the state and Selangor. Police arrested four men on May 13 and have since recovered six cars, including three 4WD vehicles, believed stolen by the gang. “The stolen vehicles are three Toyota Hilux (4WD), a Toyota Vios, a Naza Ria and a Perodua Viva, all worth an estimated RM400,000,” Osman told reporters here yesterday. The vehicles were reported stolen in Negri Sembilan and Selangor between the end of last year and early this year. Police arrested the first suspect in Sikamat on May 13 while he was driving a Toyota Hilux reported stolen in Section 6, Shah Alam, Selangor earlier that day. “After initial investigations, police arrested three other men and recovered five more vehicles, 36 road tax discs and several tools, including the electronic signal detector,” he said. The suspects – two Malaysians and two Bangladeshis – were remanded to facilitate investigations. “Investigations are going on to track down their accomplices and find out how and to whom the stolen cars are sold,” he said. – Bernama

MB vs MB: Decision today
UTRAJAYA: The Court of Appeal will deliver its judgment at 3.30pm today on an appeal by Datuk Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir against a High Court ruling last week that Pakatan Rakyat’s Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin is the rightful mentri besar of Perak. A three-member panel of Datuk Md Raus Shariff, Datuk Zainun Ali and Datuk Ahmad Maarop fixed the date for judgment after spending almost seven hours yesterday hearing submissions from the appellant Zambry, respondent Mohammad Nizar, and Attorney-General Tan Sri Abdul Gani Patail as the intervener. Earlier, Mohammad Nizar had requested a panel of five Appeal Court judges to hear the appeal, but was refused, Bernama reported. On May 11, High Court (Appellate and Special Powers Division) judge Datuk Abdul Aziz Abd Rahim had ruled that Mohammad Nizar



did not vacate the office of mentri besar as he had not lost majority confidence in the state legislative assembly. Mohammad Nizar had also applied to the court to set aside the stay of execution order obtained by Zambry against the High Court ruling. However, both sides agreed that the court should hear Zambry’s appeal proper first. These were the arguments from the parties: Zambry’s counsel, Datuk Cecil Abraham, cited 24 grounds of the appeal with nine main issues. The trial judge had wrongly interpreted Article 16, 18 and 36 of the Perak Constitution. “Article 16 is very clear and unambigous. It says, when the mentri besar lost the majority confidence, he must resign. It does not say that he must go back to the state legislative assembly (to table the motion of no-confidence).” The trial judge was also wrong in holding that the Sultan of Perak had no power to make an enquiry to ascertain whether there was a deadlock in the state legislative assembly or whether Mohammad Nizar had lost the majority confidence of the house. The vote of no-confidence is not the only way to ascertain if the respondent has ceased to command the confidence of the majority. Under the constitution, there is no specific provision requiring a motion of no-confidence to be passed by the members of the state legislative assembly before ascertaining that the mentri besar had lost the majority confidence. The High Court’s decision was made without considering the facts and relevant documents in the case.



“The judgment completely lacked judicial appreciation of the facts and documents, therefore making the declaration as granted by the High Court wrong.” Documentary evidence showed that there was no deadlock in Perak politics before Mohammad Nizar had an audience with the Sultan on Feb 4. “This is because, on Feb 3, three assemblymen – Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang), Mohd Osman Mohd Jailu (Changkat Jering) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) – had sent letters to Sultan Azlan Shah informing him that they had lost confidence in Mohammad Nizar and pledged support to the Barisan Nasional. “The letters were received by the Sultan at 3pm, that was before the Sultan had the audience with Mohammad Nizar at 5pm. As at 5pm, when Mohammad Nizar requested for the dissolution, what was the state of politics in Perak at that time? The learned trial judge had failed to address his mind and to consider this at all in his judgment.”

Tan Sri Abdul Gani’s submission:
Mohammad Nizar cannot claim that he had the confidence of the majority as there was an equal vote of 28 each on either side (Pakatan and Barisan Nasional). “This case is a 50-50 situation. It means that there is no majority or minority. In fact, the respondent (Mohammad Nizar) had 28 votes, including Speaker V. Sivakumar, but under the standing orders, the speaker cannot vote.” Mohammad Nizar had in his audience with Sultan Azlan Shah on Feb 4


» »



» Turn to Page 2