Perak's Barisan Nasional Menteri Besar Zambry Abd Kadir claimed by virtue of Sultan Azlan Shah's decision not to grant the dissolution of the assembly, it had led to Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin's resignation.

sultan azlan zambry abdul kadir nizar jamaluddin perak state govt crisis 030309 Zambry in his affidavit in reply filed on April 13, stated the ruler was satisfied that he and BN commanded the majority, following the switch of the three assemblypersons - Mohd Osman Jailu (Changkat Jering), Jamaluddin Mohd Radzi (Behrang) and Hee Yit Foong (Jelapang) - who pledged their loyalty to the coaltion.

"As the sultan was satisfied that he commanded and secured the support of the majority, I was appointed as menteri besar on Feb 6 based on provisions in the Perak constitution," the BN Perak menteri besar claimed in the 34-page affidavit in reply to Mohd Nizar's judicial review application.

Zambry said that Article 16(6) of the Perak constitution stated that in the event the sultan do not allow the dissolution, it would deem Mohd Nizar would have resigned as he did not command the support of the majority of the state legislative assembly.

He claimed that there was no express provision in the Perak constitution which require that the motion of no-confidence must be tabled at the assembly, before the sultan decided in appointing him as the new menteri besar.

The BN menteri besar also stated the sultan used his prerogative under Article 16(2) and was satisfied that Zambry commanded the support of the majority and that he (Zambry) was lawfully and constitutionally appointed by the ruler.

Mohd Nizar had no legal basis to dispute

He claimed Mohd Nizar had no legal basis to dispute the fact that he was the rightful menteri besar.

As the appointment and the call for dissolution of the assembly is the prerogative of the sultan and was not justiciable, Zambry claimed he had the legal right under the constitution to perform his duties as the menteri besar.

Zambry alleged Mohd Nizar filed the judicial review application with an ulterior motive and was politically-motivated to prevent governance of the Perak government.

He claimed that his appointment was lawful and provided a copy of his letter of appointment by Sultan Azlan Shah. Hence, he claimed he had provided ample evidence for the court to dismiss Mohd Nizar's application.

The case is slated this Thursday for hearing the Attorney-General's Chambers application to enter as an intervener, where the chambers cited the declarations sought by Mohd Nizar was based on the Perak constitution, the case was of public interests and it is the guardian of public interests.

ghani patail gani 060409 In attorney-general Abdul Gani Patail's supporting affidavit to the application, the AG stated there appears to be confusion by both parties in interpreting the Perak constitution.

He claimed that as the guardian of public interests, the chambers should be allowed to intervene as it required an interpretation of the Perak constitution and it also want to see the matter decided.

Meanwhile, Mohd Nizar objected to the AG's application to intervene citing several cases before the High Court and Federal Court, the AG as the custodian of the people had always seemed to have sided the BN.