If Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak could have engineered the Perak constitutional crisis in 2009, there is no reason why former prime minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad cannot do the same to him, said former de facto law minister Zaid Ibrahim.

"It is the same basic principle of removing a leader through democratic means.

"You (Najib) can't say ‘Only I can do it but you (Mahathir) can'’t," said Zaid during a press conference at his house today.

The Perak constitutional crisis saw the then eleven-month-old Pakatan Rakyat-led state government being overthrown after three assemblypersons defected to BN.

Zaid was earlier today questioned by the police under the Sedition Act 1948 over contents of his speech delivered at the Royal Selangor Club in September.

In his speech, Zaid had urged Malaysians to rally behind Mahathir who has become the strongest critic of Najib's administration.

BN, with support of three former Pakatan assemblypersons, had formed the Perak state government and it led to a series of court battles between former PAS menteri besar Nizar Jamaluddin and Umno's Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Ultimately, the Federal Court, in February 2010, declared Zambry as the lawful menteri besar.

"We will put up a strong defence. We believe the Perak case is on our side.

"You can organise yourself to vote out an undemocratic leader. I can (also) do that. That's what the Federal Court said," said Zaid.

'Defending democracy'

Zaid insisted he is merely exercising his right as a citizen and that the Federal Court decision had reaffirmed how such attempts, so long as done in a democratic manner, were a constitutional act.

"I was defending democracy. I was defending the rule of law.

"When somebody tried to subvert that, any law-abiding Malaysian must agree that this is (toppling of government) something that happens all the time (in a democracy)," he said.

Aside from tabling a vote of no-confidence motion, Pakatan Rakyat MPs in the Dewan Rakyat today are expected to try and vote against Najib's Budget 2016 as one way to show a loss of confidence in his administration.