Fresh elections should be held in Perak and the state assembly dissolved to pave way for a credible state government said law academics during a public forum entitled ‘Whither the Constitution? Lessons to be learnt from the Perak crisis'.

Renowned law professor Shad Saleem Faruqi said this would be one of the best options to resolve the political impasse in Perak.

"Let us go back and let the people decide," said Shad.

He opined that Barisan Nasional's capture of Perak outside the electoral process won them political gain but at a very heavy price.

That price, he said was the public's significant loss of faith in many constitutional and legal institutions including the royalty, the courts, police and Perak civil servants.

NONE He also said that Sultan Azlan Shah's decision not to dissolve the state assembly was "morally questionable, politically controversial but legally it had some basis".

"In 2008, the Pakatan government holds a 31-28 plurality but in 2009, the Sultan might have thought it was a reversal, with BN holding a 31-28 plurality. "

' All about numbers'

Shad said that sadly politics in parliamentary democracies were not about morality but "about numbers".

"I am sad PKR has lost the numbers to hoppers," he noted.

Relying on Perak constitution Article 63 to 64, Shad said the sultan could have referred the following matters to the Federal Court:

  • The legality of the open dated resignation letters (of the three state assemblypersons who choose to be independent),
  • The conflicting views of the Speaker and,
  • The function and viability of elections.

"I am sure the Federal Court would not have delayed it by weeks or months. They would have given him the decision within a few days," he opined.

malaysian law conference 291007 sultan azlan shah 1 Alternatively, Shad said the sultan ( right ) could have asked the three party-hoppers to face the assembly and prove their support on the floor. This, he said, "would have saved the sultan from any suspicion of bias or partisanship".

Not treason to challenge sultan

Shad also remarked that challenging the constitutionality of the sultan's decision is not treason as these are matters of politics.

He said that from the start, the official actions of the Agong and sultans have been open to challenge in courts.

"There was no question of any treason," he said.

He cited the example of Kalong Ningkan challenging the dismissal of the governor, Tay Chen Poh for protesting an emergency proclamation by the Agong.

Noted lawyer and DAP parliamentarian Karpal Singh had also at one time sued the Sultan of Kelantan in relation to a pardon case.

Concurring with Shad, lawyer and constitutional law expert Tommy Thomas described what had happened in Perak as a "coup d'état at both the executive and legislative branches level".

"At the executive, without going through the ballot box, there was a change of government.

"As for the legislature, without complying with the terms of the Perak state constitution, the speaker was forcibly and violently removed.

"In the fifty year history of parliamentary democracy in Malaysia's constitutional monarchy, the grab for power in Perak was of the worst kind," he said.

He stressed that the solution would be to dissolve the assembly and allow the people of Perak to elect their own government.

"Until that happens, there is going to be bitterness within the Nizar administration and the people of Perak who have been cheated and betrayed," he said.

Singaporean law professor Kevin Tan was present to lend support although he could not be part of the forum panel.

He was barred from speaking at the eleventh hour after the police rejected his application for a permit.

The forum was organised by Merdeka Review at the MBPJ civic centre auditorium on Wednesday night.Ousted Perak menteri besar Nizar Jamaluddin was also present.