Why is PKR now suing its former MPs and ADUNs for RM10 million each in reliance of an Agreement that they signed when they contested under PKR now?
PKR is suing six of its former members of parliament and 10 former assemblymen who defected during the 2020 "Sheraton Move" that brought down the Pakatan Harapan (PH) federal government. The party is seeking RM10 million each for allegedly breaching a party bond following their defection. - NST, 6/3/2026
For one, I am of the opinion, that such agreement is against the Constitution, and is against 'parliamentary democracy' - it is an AGREEMENT that can effectively 'FORCE' MPs/ADUNs to no more be INDEPENDENT, and force them to just do as the Party(or its leaders at the time) ORDERS and tells them what to do - but should not MPs and/or ADUNs be free and independent, being the persons elected by the people to represent them, thus meaning at times, they MAY not act as Anwar or the party wants, but as the people wants - or as what they feel should be RIGHT based on their own values/principles? Remember, that most of them NEVER left PKR on their own but was EXPELLED by the Party. Remember too, that they also could not challenge their possibly WRONGFUL EXPULSION because of that DRACONIAN provision in the law > that makes party decisions Final and unchallengable in COURT (Worse, the Court also is PROHIBITED from hearing such applications by members of a political party against the PARTY.) Should not Anwar and the MADANI government REPEAL such provisions - restoring the right of members to go to Court if they are 'aggrieved' with party decisions including 'wrongful dismissal' from parties?
Section 18C Societies Act 1966 - Decision of political party to be final and conclusive
The decision of a political party or any person authorized by it or by its constitution or rules or regulations made under the constitution on the interpretation of its constitution, rules or regulations or on any matter relating to the affairs of the party shall be final and conclusive and such decision shall not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed, quashed or called in question in any court on any ground, and no court shall have jurisdiction to entertain or determine any suit, application, question or proceedings on any ground regarding the validity of such decision.
Is this a 'THREAT' addressed to all MPs, who allegedly support Anwar unquestioningly from the PH, and maybe the Parties that now are in the MADANI Coalition - there may have similar agreements signed by such political parties, and/or with their MPs/ADUNs? Is there? Transparency demands disclosure of any such agreements...
If these agreements were to support Anwar for PM until GE16 - would that be UNCONSTITUTIONAL - because our constitution says that a Prime Minister can be 'removed' the moment he loses the confidence of the majority of MPs - that means there should be NO SUCH KINDS of Agreements that prevent MPs from being able to withdraw support for Anwar Ibrahim to be MP at any time....
In Malaysia, and so too in all political parties, there is always members that may hold a different view/position from their own political party in some issues.
The 1MDB scandal was primarily exposed in early 2015 (specifically starting around February/March 2015) through investigative reports by The Edge, Sarawak Report, and The Wall Street Journal. These reports revealed that hundreds of millions of dollars had been siphoned from the state investment fund into private accounts, including those belonging to then-Prime Minister Najib Razak.
In another sensational expose, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) reported today that Malaysian investigators have traced nearly US$700 million of deposits into what they believe are personal bank accounts of Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak. WSJ cited documents from a government probe, which both the international financial newspaper and whistleblower website Sarawak Report have obtained. According to WSJ, the investigation documents mark the first time Najib has been directly connected to investigation into the troubled state investment fund. - Malaysiakini, 3/7/2015
If Malaysian MPs had speedily in 2015 or soon thereafter exercised their right to remove Najib Razak as Prime Minister - would Malaysia have been able to MITIGATE or reduce the losses suffered by Malaysia and the 1MDB. Why did the majority of MPs do this? Was there similar agreements and/or BONDs they signed, that could lead to legal suits by Najib or their own political parties? We NOW realize that even if the then law enforcement or the Attorney General/Public Prosecutor had investigated, it may not be possible to get the TRUTH, because of the Prime Minister's power in their appointment or removal as AG/PP, and many other heads of law enforcement. Even the members of the Board of Directors, seem to be that they cannot do anything, even if they know it is wrong, if the SHAREHOLDERS orders/instruct them, and the shareholders were 'Malaysians', represented by Prime Minister, Najib Razak - who also did 'pick' the Directors???
"All the directors were compelled to comply with and implement the decisions and instructions of Najib as represented by Nik Faisal or through letters and documents signed by him."Whatever our opinions or comments were, Nik Faisal would tell us that the projects or matters had already been approved and endorsed by Najib or the government," said Shahrol, who is named as one of the third parties in the suit...."The instructions conveyed by Nik Faisal during board meetings are confirmed in the minutes of shareholders' meetings signed personally by Najib, and he is relaying Najib's decisions, which all directors are obliged to implement," he explained - Malaysiakini, 3/3/2026
This is unfortunately TRUE - all Directors of Government companies/GLCs or any other company, are bound to follow the directions/instructions of the owners(shareholders) - and in this case, the shareholders is the Malaysian people/government, and the Prime Minister is the legitimate representative of the shareholders. (Now, the LAW at present does not even allow the Directors to report their differing views/opinions to the Malaysian public, or even Parliament - maybe this should be changed??)
Now PM Anwar Ibrahim has similar power as Najib then, who also is both Prime Minister and Finance Minister...and the same RISKS remain??? In MACC itself, it is the PM that chooses, the MACC Chief, and even in most cases, the MACC's Statutory Bodies meant to monitor MACC, and the Prime Minister is also responsible as MACC comes under the jurisdiction of the PM's department.
PARLIAMENT can, and could, monitor any Government owned companies, and/or GLCs to prevent abuse/wrongdoings - there is still no such active Parliamentary Select committee, that is actively monitoring GLCs - with the power to receive public complaints, power to hold Public Inquiries, power to summon and get testimonies from Directors/CEOs or other officers...so, we risk a repeat of the 1MDB or SRC Scandals...
There is even no LAW on the Cabinet - where it should require at least Cabinet approval before any decision by the PM/Ministers or GLCs can be carried out - if it involves maybe more than RM5 million. When do the PM or Ministers need to get Cabinet approval? Recently, Cabinet appointed a Special Committee to investigate just into Azam Baki's shareholding, and not into the other SERIOUS allegations of that alleged 'corporate mafia' and how some MACC officers maybe abusing their powers as MACC officers, to compel actions of some businessman for the benefit of certain businessman.
Was that Cabinet decision UNANIMOUS, or was that only a simple majority decision? Was here a VOTE in Cabinet - what was the result - how many for, how many opposed and how many abstained? - WE really need a LAW to decide on how the Malaysian Cabinet operates, including being the 'first' check and balance mechanism to prevent abuse of power by the Prime Minister and/or any other Minister.
NOW, after that 'Cabinet decision' to just investigate the shareholding issues, some Government parties and MPs are openly criticizing or questioning this Prime Minister and Cabinet decision - much more than the usual few like Hassan Karim..
...in the Dewan Rakyat today, RSN Rayer (PH–Jelutong) questioned why there is no independent oversight mechanism for the MACC similar to the Independent Police Conduct Commission, which monitors the police force."Recently, we have heard various matters receiving extensive coverage not only in local media, but also internationally, including by Bloomberg."We heard that the MACC had been described as a 'corporate mafia'. I wonder whether there is a need for our country to establish a commission to monitor the MACC as well," he said...Hassan Karim (PH–Pasir Gudang) likewise urged the government to establish an RCI to probe both the "corporate mafia" claims and the issue surrounding Azam's shareholding. - NST, 24/2/2026
Transport Minister Anthony Loke said he will table a proposal at the Cabinet meeting on Feb 27 to set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) – Malaysia’s highest form of public inquiry, convened under the King’s authority and reserved for matters of serious national concern.The call is a direct escalation from the Cabinet’s Feb 13 decision to form a special task force headed by Attorney-General Dusuki Mokhtar, to investigate related controversies. Mr Loke argued that this mechanism falls short because it covers only MACC chief commissioner Azam Baki’s shareholding breach, and not the broader allegation, reported by Bloomberg, that MACC officers colluded with businessmen in a “corporate mafia” scheme to force corporate takeovers. “To be frank, I feel the government’s response has been inadequate and does not meet public expectations,” Mr Loke, who is the Democratic Action Party (DAP) leader and secretary-general, told Malaysiakini in an interview published on Feb 24.- Straits Times, 24/2/2026
Now, did the Minister raise this issue/concern during the Cabinet meeting that decided to set up that 'special task force' just to look into the Azam's shareholding issue? Or, it this something that Anthony Loke decided on after that Cabinet decision - did Anthony Loke vote in favour, oppose or abstain, when the Cabinet made that decision on just looking into the shareholding issue, and ignore the more serious 'corporate mafia' issue, where there are allegations that some MACC officers may have abused their powers as MACC officers?
Pandan MP Rafizi Ramli has claimed that the government's decision to delay establishing a royal commission of inquiry (RCI) into the MACC "corporate mafia" allegations is a clear ploy to buy time.He said there's no reason the RCI can't run in tandem with the attorney-general-led investigations into MACC chief Azam Baki's shareholdings scandal, as the two issues are quite separate...."So to say that it (RCI) has to wait for the (shareholding) investigation before the RCI can be considered, it’s quite obvious that it’s a ploy to delay."They want to buy more time, and deflate DAP building pressure for the RCI," Rafizi (above) told Malaysiakini. DAP's call for the RCI was discussed in the cabinet meeting on Friday. Communications Minister Fahmi Fadzil later told the press that it was decided that an RCI would only be considered after the shareholding investigation is concluded....The so-called "corporate mafia" refers to allegations that the MACC colluded with private individuals to shake down business rivals. - Malaysiakini, 1/3/2026
So, consider whether this PKR suit is a 'WARNING" to government MPs and/or Government parties, who decided to express a different view from the Prime Minister's position or the Cabinet position(which may have been a simple majority decision)?
ANOTHER ODDITY - Why did PKR not sue Azmin Ali, largely perceived as the 'leader' of them PKR MPs that were ultimately 'kicked out' by PKR? Did Azmin(then PKR No.2) not sign such an agreement with PKR? Was he already sued before?
PKR deputy president Azmin Ali has resigned from the party. 10 other PKR MPs also followed Azmin in exiting the party. The 11 MPs say they plan to form an independent bloc in the Dewan Rakyat. The announcement came just moments after PKR announced that it would be sacking Azmin and party vice president Zuraida Kamaruddin. - Malaysiakini, 24/2/2020
A LEGAL RIGHT consideration - PKR can only sue within 6 years of the alleged breach, and time will soon be running out - LIMITATION period. But the question is when exactly did that breach of the Bond Agreement happen. Was it on 24/2/2020 - noting that 'The suits, filed by legal firm Nav & Co on Feb 19, are scheduled for case management at the High Court on March 27. What was exactly the 'breach' is something I am curious to know???
MY OPINION - we need to make ILLEGAL any such Agreements, that affect the INDEPENDENCE and Freedom of Expression of a Member of Parliament, who is the peoples' representative. They should never be prohibitted from being able their differing views, different from the PM or government of the day, or even their own political party or its leadership. This also violates the role/purpose of MPs in Parliament - which is to be a check and balance of the Executive branch of Government(PM and/or Cabinet) - which means they must express their OWN views, and freely question all decisions of PM and government. If they are prevented this FREEDOM, then it may be UNCONSTITUTIONAL??
Most important, is that MPs have the power to withdraw confidence/support on any sitting Prime Minister - and a loss of the support of the majority of MPs means the Prime Minister has to resign or be removed. So, even when a political party leader is the Prime Minister, that party MPs should still have the right to 'withdraw confidence/support' from the said Prime Minister.
After 1MDB/SRC scandal, if only Malaysian MPs had exercised the power and duty given to them by the Federal Constitution, Malaysia may been able to MITIGATE the losses suffered...but Najib remained PM until GE14 in 2018, despite the fact that the 1MDB scandal came to light in 2015.
Now, PM Anwar is facing many NEW Scandals - so, is it better to REMOVE him NOW, or wait? MPs have the responsibility to decide...and, if they choose not to DECIDE placing the best interest of Malaysia and/or Malaysian people, because of worry that they may be sued by their party (or even Anwar Ibrahim), depending on the agreements/bonds they or their party signed, then, in my opinion, it is an UNFORGIVABLE act by our peoples' representatives.
I believe that all them MPs that chose not to remove their vote of confidence for Najib, after the 1MDB expose, also deserves to face the WRATH of the people. It is no excuse to say that they were bound to follow ORDERS/Instructions of their Party - so, they could NOT act against the Party.
UNDERSTAND that removing a PM because of suspicions/allegations does not mean that the said PM is GUILTY of the allegations made - that will be decided if and when he is charged and tried by Court.
HOWEVER, it is better to be SAFE than sorry - and just remove the sitting Prime Minister for now...This is MY Opinion.
PKR should withdraw the Legal suit against its former MPs and ADUNs - that would be an indication that PKR believes that all MPs/ADUNs are free to express their opinions and act as peoples' representatives, even if their stance at times goes against the Party's position. PKR should also say, that they will NO MORE try to 'enslave' its MPs/ADUNs forcing them to OBEY the Party(and its leaders) 100% - MPs/ADUNs are FREE to play the role as 'effective check and balance' in Parliament, including opposing or disagreeing with the government's position/stance...This kind of POSITION would be welcomed by the people of Malaysia, for finally MPs/ADUNs can be TRUE Peoples' Representatives - no more inhibited in the expression of the views/actions in Parliament...
PEOPLE - let us VOTE for MPs/ADUNs that are FREE to do their duties as Peoples' Representative, rejecting any who sign any agreement that forces them to simply follow Party Orders,...we want INDEPENDENT peoples' representative, those brave enough to speak out even against the Prime Minister for the BEST INTEREST of Malaysians and Malaysia...
CONSIDER Now MPs - should I withdraw support, or continue to maintain support, for the current PM Anwar Ibrahim...??
To date, there is NO CLEAR UNDISPUTABLE EVIDENCE of how many Malaysian MPs actually support PM Anwar Ibrahim to remain PM. As the last 'vote of confidence' there was NO VOTE count do...
Should we create a mechanism that SHOWS clearly how many MPs still support the PM - maybe on the Parliamentary Website, a indicator of how many MPs support the PM - where only MP alone can vote...or change their VOTES..(in secret?)
PM support may reasonably vary from time - and when that Parliamentary Website shows the support declining or increasing - IT will also force the PM to evaluate his actions/decisions and maybe change it before support from MPs decline to LESS than majority...
Malaysia also lacks ONLINE polls, best every week, that could also alert the PM and Cabinet when the people are NOT happy - giving an opportunity to re-assess policy or action(or non-actions) ...
PKR sues former MPs, assemblymen over Sheraton Move defections
KUALA LUMPUR: PKR is suing six of its former members of parliament and 10 former assemblymen who defected during the 2020 "Sheraton Move" that brought down the Pakatan Harapan (PH) federal government.
The party is seeking RM10 million each for allegedly breaching a party bond following their defection.
PKR secretary-general Datuk Dr Fuziah Salleh, filing on behalf of the party, named Baru Bian (Selangau), Kamarudin Jaffar (Bandar Tun Razak), Mansor Othman (Nibong Tebal), Rashid Hasnon (Batu Pahat), Saifuddin Abdullah (Indera Mahkota) and R Santhara Kumar as defendants.
The suits, filed by legal firm Nav & Co on Feb 19, are scheduled for case management at the High Court on March 27.
The claims are based on a legal bond signed by all candidates before the 14th general election (GE14) in 2018.
Under the agreement, candidates were required to pay RM10 million within seven days if they won their seats on a PKR ticket but later resigned, joined another party or became independent.
Fuziah said the defendants' exit on Feb 24, 2020, was "public knowledge" and directly led to the collapse of the 22-month PH federal government.
She said the party had spent substantial resources building its brand and supporting the candidates, only for their "realignment" to alter the governing majority and betray the voters' mandate.
While Baru Bian later joined a Sarawak-based party, the other five defendants supported Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin during the Sheraton Move, leading to the formation of the Perikatan Nasional (PN) government.
PKR officially terminated their memberships on March 11, 2020, after they failed to respond to demands for the bond payment.
Fuziah said the resignations or realignment of the defendants after the election altered the composition of the governing majority at the federal or state level and affected the party's ability to carry out the mandate obtained at the election.
In September 2020, Saifuddin Nasution Ismail, then PKR secretary-general, filed a similar suit against then Ampang MP Zuraida Kamaruddin, who also left the party in support of Muhyiddin.
The Court of Appeal ordered her to pay the party RM100,000. PKR has since appealed to the Federal Court seeking a higher amount. - NST, 6/3/2026
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment