SEPARATION OF POWERS

As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on October 20, 2015

1. The Deputy Prime Minister made reference to the separation of power when commenting on the statement of the Rulers over the need for investigations on 1MDB and the 2.6 billion Ringgit in Najib’s account to be expedited. Is this a breach of the assumed separation of powers between the Rulers and the Government?

2. It is true that the Agong and the Malay Rulers are constitutional monarchs. But that does not mean that they are just rubber stamps to validate all the acts of their governments.

3. Sec 39 of the Federal Constitution (State constitutions follow closely that of the Federal constitution) states clearly that “The executive authority of the Federation shall be vested in the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and exercisable, subject to the provision of any Federal law and of the Second Schedule, by him or any Minister authorised by the Cabinet, but the Parliament may by law confer executive functions on other persons.

4. Section 40 states clearly that the Agong shall be entitled, at his request to any information available to the Cabinet.

5. These two sections clearly gives the Yang di-Pertuan Agong some executive roles.

6. Section 40 para (2) clearly states the Yang di-Pertuan Agong may act in his discretion in the performance of;

a) the appointment of the Prime Minister

b) the withholding of consent to a request for dissolution of Parliament

c) Federal law may make provisions for requiring the Agong to act after consultation with or on the recommendation of any person or body of persons

7. In the recent past we have seen Rulers rejecting nominees by the majority party for the office of Menteri Besar.

8. Should the Prime Minister request for the dissolution of Parliament, the Agong may reject.

9. Again we see here that the Agong and the Rulers may act on their own discretion. They may also consult and accept recommendations of any person or body of persons.

10. Obviously if petitions are made or there is a public clamour, the rulers may not have to listen only to the Cabinet.

11. Section 41 unequivocally states that the Yang di- Pertuan Agong shall be the Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces of the Federation. Clearly it is not just the privilege of wearing the uniform.

12. What is clear is that nothing in the Constitution talks about the separation of power between the Government and the Agong. In fact in many instances the Agong may act at his own discretion.

13. And the Agong may listen to other people than the Cabinet. This is only as it should be as failure of the Cabinet to address complaints by the people may require the Agong and the Rulers to urge the Government to respond.

14. In making their statement the Rulers were not in any way exceeding the provisions of the constitution. They were in fact abiding by the provisions of the constitution.

15. On the other hand the same cannot be said regarding the principle of the separation of powers between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary.

16. Currently the Prime Minister as head of the elected legislators is clearly not respecting these principles.

17. For example officers of the administration who were investigating 1MDB and the 2.6 billion Ringgit account have been transferred out to the Prime Minister’s Office, resulting in their stopping their work. Their replacements apparently was with approvals of the Prime Minister.

18. Officers of the MACC have been similarly treated, again resulting in the investigations being obstructed.

19. The Attorney-General, a member of the judicial establishment have been removed while he was carrying out the task of preparing the said case for the courts. In his place a judge was transferred to take over as AG. This is actually usurping the powers of the judiciary.

20. The AG was said to be sick, but he denied he was sick. As far as is known no medical certificate certifying that he was sick seem to have been issued.

21. All these are public knowledge. The Rulers may have heard and probably received petitions on the authoritarian disregard for the law and rules of Government.

22. The citizens of this country are the subjects of the Rulers. As Rulers they must care for the welfare of the people.

23. If in their opinion the Government should allow expeditious investigations to be carried over the issues of concern to the people and the country it is the duty of the Ruler to make known to the Government the dissatisfaction of the people over the issue and to ask for the matter to be attended to.

Versi BM

PENGASINGAN KUASA

1. Timbalan Perdana Menteri merujuk kepada pengasingan kuasa apabila mengulas kenyataan Raja-Raja mengenai keperluan mempercepatkan penyiasatan ke atas 1MDB dan RM2.6 bilion dalam akaun Najib. Adakah ini satu pelanggaran pengasingan kuasa yang diandaikan antara Raja-Raja dan Kerajaan?

2. Ianya benar bahawa Agong dan Raja-Raja Melayu adalah raja berperlembagaan. Tetapi itu tidak bermakna bahawa mereka adalah pak turut semata-mata untuk mengesahkan semua tindakan Kerajaan.

3. Perkara 39 Perlembagaan Persekutuan (Perlembagaan Negeri mengikuti Perlembagaan Persekutuan) menyatakan dengan jelas bahawa “Kuasa Eksekutif Persekutuan hendaklah terletak kepada Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan, tertakluk kepada peruntukan mana-mana Undang-Undang Persekutuan dan peruntukan Jadual Kedua, dijalankan olehnya atau mana-mana Menteri yang diberi kuasa oleh Jemaah Menteri, tetapi Parlimen boleh, melalui undang-undang, memberikan fungsi eksekutif kepada individu lain.”

4. Perkara 40 menyatakan dengan jelas bahawa Agong adalah berhak, atas permintaannya, mendapat segala maklumat yang ada kepada Kabinet.

5. Kedua-dua bahagian ini jelas memberikan Yang di-Pertuan Agong beberapa peranan eksekutif.

6. Perkara 40 Peranggan (2) jelas menyatakan Yang di-Pertuan Agong boleh bertindak menurut budi bicaranya dalam melaksanakan fungsi:

a) melantik seorang Perdana Menteri

b) tidak memperkenankan permintaan bagi pembubaran Parlimen

c) Undang-Undang Persekutuan boleh membuat peruntukan bagi mengkehendaki Agong bertindak selepas berunding dengan atau atas cadangan mana-mana individu atau sekumpulan individu.

7. Pada kebelakangan ini, kita melihat Raja-Raja telah menolak pencalonan oleh parti majoriti bagi jawatan Menteri Besar.

8. Sekiranya Perdana Menteri meminta untuk membubarkan Parlimen, Agong boleh menolak.

9. Sekali lagi kita lihat di sini bahawa Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan Raja-Raja boleh bertindak atas budi bicara mereka sendiri. Mereka juga boleh berunding dan menerima cadangan daripada mana-mana individu atau kumpulan individu.

10. Jelas sekali jika petisyen telah dibuat atau ada suara desakan ramai, Raja-Raja tidak perlu hanya mendengar Kabinet.

11. Seksyen 41 tanpa ragu-ragu menyatakan bahawa Yang di-Pertuan Agong hendaklah menjadi Pemerintah Tertinggi Angkatan Tentera Persekutuan. Jelas sekali ini bukan sahaja hak istimewa untuk pemakaian seragam tersebut.

12. Apa yang jelas ialah tiada apa jua dalam Perlembagaan yang bercakap mengenai pengasingan kuasa di antara Kerajaan dan Agong. Malah dalam kebanyakkan keadaan, Yang di-Pertuan Agong boleh bertindak mengikut budi bicara sendiri.

13. Dan Agong boleh mendengar individu selain daripada Kabinet. Inilah sebenar hakikat yang diharapkan kerana kegagalan Kabinet untuk menangani aduan rakyat memerlukan Agong dan Raja-Raja menggesa Kerajaan untuk bertindak balas.

14. Dalam membuat kenyataan mereka, Raja-Raja tidak berada dalam keadaan melebihi had peruntukan Perlembagaan. Mereka sebenarnya mematuhi peruntukan perlembagaan.

15. Sebaliknya, yang sama tidak boleh dikatakan mengenai prinsip pengasingan kuasa antara perundangan, eksekutif dan kehakiman.

16. Pada masa ini, Perdana Menteri, sebagai ketua penggubal undang-undang yang dipilih, secara jelas tidak menghormati prinsip-prinsip ini.

17. Sebagai contoh pegawai-pegawai pentadbiran yang sedang menyiasat 1MDB dan akaun RM2.6 bilion telah dipindahkan ke Jabatan Perdana Menteri, menyebabkan pemberhentian kerja mereka. Penggantian mereka adalah ketara dengan kelulusan Perdana Menteri.

18. Pegawai-pegawai SPRM telah diberi layanan yang sama, sekali lagi menyebabkan siasatan terhalang.

19. Peguam Negara, seorang ahli badan kehakiman telah disingkirkan ketika beliau menjalankan tugas menyediakan kes tersebut untuk mahkamah. Di tempat beliau seorang hakim telah dipindahkan untuk mengambil alih tugas sebagai Peguam Negara. Ini sebenarnya perampasan kuasa badan kehakiman.

20. Peguam Negara dikatakan sakit, tetapi dia menafikan dirinya sakit. Setakat yang diketahui, tiada sijil perubatan yang mengesahkan bahawa dia sakit telah dikeluarkan.

21. Semua ini adalah pengetahuan umum. Raja-Raja mungkin pernah mendengar dan mungkin juga menerima petisyen mengenai sikap pengabaian secara authoritarian undang-undang dan peraturan Kerajaan.

22. Rakyat negara ini adalah subjek Raja-Raja. Sebagai Raja-Raja mereka perlu menjaga kebajikan rakyat.

23. Jika pada pendapat mereka, Kerajaan perlu membenarkan siasatan cepat dan cekap dijalankan ke atas isu-isu yang penting kepada rakyat dan negara ini, adalah kewajipan Raja untuk memaklumkan kepada Kerajaan rasa tidak puas hati rakyat dengan isu ini dan meminta perkara ini diberi perhatian.

1 MDB CLEARED

As posted by Dr. Mahathir Mohamad at Che Det on October 09, 2015

1. The Attorney Generals Chambers have cleared 1MDB of any wrongdoings with regard to the use of the funds approved by Bank Negara for foreign investments.

2. But Bank Negara is obviously not satisfied and appealed to the AG without any change in the report. Again the AG rejected the appeal.

3. We know of course that the AG is empowered to decide whether a case should go to court or not. The presumption is that the AG would appreciate and understand the seriousness or otherwise of the case before him, that he would appreciate the concern of the complainant or agency making the report, that if there is dissatisfaction the case should be judged in a court of law by a judge and if still dissatisfied that an appeal be allowed.

4. That should be the way. But it would seem that the AG has made the judgement, rejecting the case as having no merit for a hearing in a court of law. And when an appeal is made, the appeal is dismissed by him on grounds which are not clear. There is a lack of transparency here.

5. Is this the rule of law that this country is supposed to uphold? Is the AG higher than a judge, that his judgement is final and there can be no appeal?

6. In this particular case the people would like to know whether the Prime Minister is involved or not. By dismissing this case suspicions will remain in the minds of the people. In fact people are thinking that the decision of the AG may not be by the AG.

7. On the other hand we are seeing people being detained under a law supposedly meant for curbing terrorism.

8. In his speech when introducing Rang Undang-Undang Kesalahan Keselamatan (Security Offences (Special Measures) Act) 2012 the PM said activities which undermine parliamentary democracy is interpreted as an activity carried out by an individual or a group with the intention of toppling or undermining parliamentary democracy through violence and in contravention of the Constitution

9. The Security Offences law itself confines its application to security matters. It provides for the arrest and detention by a police officer any person whom he has reason to believe to be involved in security offences for twenty-four hours and for the purpose of investigations, detention can be extended for not more than twenty-eight days.

10. The arrests of Dato Khairuddin and his lawyer Matthias Chang have created fear among the people that reporting about wrongdoings of the Government and its officers constitute threats to security. Whistle-blowers which the Government is said to encourage, is now threatened with the danger of being accused of threatening the nations security.

11. With this the call by the Rulers for probes to be conducted fairly and in a transparent manner can no longer be achieved. There are literally dozens of people with knowledge of the wrongdoings in 1MDB who will not risk giving evidence or making accusations because they risk being detained and charged under the Security Offences Act.

12. We all know that the investigations into the 1MDB affairs and the USD 700 million in Dato Sri Najibs personal account has been jeopardised by the removal of the AG, the transfer of the MACC officers, the emasculation of the Public Accounts Committee and the implied threat against Bank Negara. Now lawyers for the defence can be questioned and detained.

13. These actions have intensified the lack of confidence and distrust of the people in the Government. Merely by stating the investigation is on going will not convince people that truth will prevail.

14. In the eyes of the world Malaysia has become a pariah state, a state where anyone can be hauled up and questioned by the police, detained and charged through abusing the laws of the country.

15. And the AGs Chambers will dismiss or disregard any report of wrongdoing that involves the Prime Minister.

16. Already the members of the Government are saying that no one, not even the Rulers may comment on obvious Government abuses of the laws of the country.