Monday, March 16, 2009

PR suspended 7 ADUNs, now BN's payback by suspending ...??

No Member of Parliament...and/or ADUN must be suspended for any reason. These are the people's representative - and their right to be and to participate in Parliament or State Legislative Assembly must never be impeded.

This time around - sadly it was the Perak Speaker which started this suspension nonsense. (We note that in past, we had the suspension of Karpal Singh,'...DAP MP for Sandakan Fung Ket Wing in 1984, DAP MP for Batu Gajah Fong Poh Kuan who was suspended for six months without allowance in December 2001 and my[Lim Kit Siang] seven-month suspension in 1992..." (see earlier post, The power to suspend MP/ADUNs must be removed, and)

Now, Gobind may be suspended...
Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Nazri Abdul Aziz today tabled a motion in Parliament to suspend Puchong member of parliament Gobind Singh for 12 months.

The motion was filed at about 11.30am before Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia. - Malaysiakini, 16/3/2009
, Motion against Gobind being debated
And suspending an MP/ADUN without allowance and perks is very unjust. Many MPs/ADUNs, who have no side-business or income depend 100% on their salary, allowance and perks - and this is also the money they use to pay rental of the service centres and employ their staff. Deprivation of allowances and perks is so very unjust..

I believe this fear of being suspended without pay also will keep many MPs/ADUNs silent in Parliament and the State Legislative Assembly. If I do not open my mouth, I certainly would not invite 'suspension'....I hope not.

Of course, some MPs and ADUNs may go overboard ....and invite 'suspension', but I hope it is for the right reasons - not merely to get self-publicity...and 'political mileage for oneself'. If the reason is to get 'political mileage' and publicity for a cause, then it is different...and will be acceptable.





3 comments:

ruzaimiramza said...

gobind went overboard... many times....

bn haramjadah said...

Charles who started the suspension trend, IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN uMNO appointee speakers, remember the dap chap suspended for a year, he was also beaten up but nothing happened, The difference between Umno speakers suspension and sivakumar suspending Zambry is so vast and different, zambry basicaly commited treason by going against the state assembly by not following the rules of law, plus how could a bn umno take over a state when 3 kataks had already been ruled by HAVING RESIGNED their posts as they have presigned letters of resignation, Now the letters of resignation trend and culture was created by Umno and Bn under Mahathir to keep their politicians under their thumb, What pakatan did was to give a taste to umno its own sorry medicine to them, WHY IS IT when its good for the goose its not good for the gander, Why complain.
By suing and going against the Speaker i.e. bringing him to court to overrule his decisions Umno has gone against the fundamental laws of the federal/ perak constitution, you can see how biased even the judical commisioner was by not allowing Speaker sivakumar to employ private lawyers or to even represent himself, they have been tying the speakers hands before he can defend himself,in the ring for the boxing match, if this isn't manipulations of the judicary, what is. what about the closing of the state secreteriat building and locking of doors, where the secertary- a glorified clerk is bossing his boss, HOW IS THIS POSSIBLE, it like a corporal countermanding the orders of a general in the army- what would the penalty be if it was a war.Instant execution by firing squad.
I think the Gobind Singh suspension is a trap set by Pakatan to once and for all expose Umno's double standards, Do you think they don't know what they are doing (pr), they expected this I assume, Gobind has become the sacrifical lamb, My gutt feel is now he is suspended from Parliment, he (pr) will file a suit to contest against the speaker from allowing this to happen without following the proper procedere by going to the privelages commitee first, here's a scenario, Now they file to contest against the speakers decision of double jeoperdy (gobind having been punished already by suspension for a day)ok, knowing the judicary being in Umno's pockets and slave, with CJ being a Umno appointee, the judge is going to rule that Gobind cannot take any action against the speaker of the house as he is covered by the federal constitution where No court can rule against the speaker, now they get a ruling, Gobind looses the case, gets suspended for a year- becomes a folk hero for questioning and declaring najib a murderer in Parliment what everyone has been asking, and Umno using all the federal institutions to cover it up, HOW WILL THE RULING AFFECT THE PERAK CASE. BTW I am just an lowly educated Layman who never went to law school, but this is my perception and gutt feel. What say you. How does my argument stand with you. any grounds for appeal?

Tungsten said...

Mr. Hector,
I think you miss the point about the Perak speaker starting it all.If you pay abit of attention to the past, you will notice that the B.N speakers in Parliament and state legislature have always suspended the opposition on the flimsiest reasons.But the suspension by the Perak speaker of the six excos members and Zambry was for a very good reason. they had subverted the will of the people by taking over the govt of Perak.So please dont blame the Perakspeaker for starting it first.