Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28

Thread: Selangor: SUK Appointment Not Finalised

   
   
       
  1. #21
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    K-point: Pretender Selangor SS Khusrin Is Not Appointed By The Appropriate Service Commission

    K-point: Pretender Selangor SS Khusrin Is Not Appointed By The Appropriate Service Commission
    6 January, 2011

    By NH Chan



    Pretender Khusrin? (Source: Selangorkini)

    In this scathing tract, the People’s Judge NH Chan calls Khusrin a trespasser and asks how can the palace change the meaning of the words of the Selangor Constitution to mean just what the palace chooses them to mean?

    This is what Edmund Bon said to theSun on Tuesday, 4 Jan 2011, when he was interviewed by the newspaper:

    Quoting Article 52 of the state constitution, he said "appropriate service commission" refers to the Selangor state service commission and not the Federal Public Service Commission.



    Bon said Article 132 and 139 of the Federal Constitution states that the jurisdiction of the Public Service Commission does not cover the public service commission of Selangor, except if there is a law that extends its jurisdiction to Selangor.

    Bon also said that once the state secretary is appointed by the state service commission it is "not a requirement" to consult the MB or the sultan …

    "So the state service commission should do its duty now and appoint a state a state secretary," he said.

    Bon said the oath-taking in the presence of the MB is only to allow the state secretary to sit in the executive council proceedings.
    Mr. Bon is a lawyer after my own heart because he was able to give, in a few short sentences, the correct law on the appointment of the State Secretary of Selangor. The Selangor State Government can now act accordingly on the advice which is free. I wonder if the MB had ever consulted his lawyers while the controversy was raging.

    When TMI interviewed me a few days ago, all I did was to point to the direction where one can find the answer; which is that only the appropriate Service Commission can appoint the State Secretary of Selangor and no one else. Debra Chong then asked me in the telephone interview what is the appropriate Service Commission, and I told her I am not a practising lawyer; it is not for me to find out as I don’t have a law library. If they (the Selangor State Government) are going to take the matter to court then it is the business of their lawyers to do the looking up for them. But now the intrepid Mr. Bon has done it for them gratuitously in the press interview.

    Let us see if Mr. Bon is right

    Article 52(1) of the Selangor Constitution says:

    There shall be constituted the offices of State Secretary, State Legal Adviser and State Financial Officer; and the appointments thereto shall be made by the appropriate Service Commission from amongst members of any of the relevant public services.
    As you can see the appointment of these three officials, namely State Secretary, State Legal Adviser and State Financial Officer, are chosen from members of the public service of the State (see above Article 52(1) and below Article 97(1)) by the appropriate Service Commission.

    So that the "State Secretary … shall be the principal officer in charge of the administrative affairs of the State": see Article 52(2)(a) and the "State Financial Officer shall be the principal officer in charge of the financial affairs of the State": see Article 52(2)(c). By virtue of the offices that they hold it is quite obvious that the State Secretary and the State Financial Officer are chosen from the civil service part of the public service of the State. Since the "State Legal Adviser shall advise on legal matters": see Article 52(2)(b), the relevant part of the public service of the State in this case is the legal and judicial service.

    But what is meant by the term "the appropriate Service Commission" in Article 52(1)? The answer is found in Article 97(1) which says:

    97. State Service Commission.

    (1) There shall be established a State Service Commission whose jurisdiction shall … extend to all persons who are members of the public service of the State.
    So there you have it, there is definitely a State Service Commission that has jurisdiction over all members of the State public service and the appointment of the State Secretary shall be made by this Commission "from amongst members of the relevant public service": see Article 52(1). Remember this - the operative words in Article 52(1) are "the appointments … shall be made by the appropriate Service Commission"; not by the "Public Services Commission".

    In Selangor, by virtue of Article 97(1), there is a State Service Commission. There is no such thing as a Public Services Commission in Selangor. There is, therefore, no ambiguity in the wording of "Service Commission" in Article 52(1) and this is confirmed in Article 97(1) by the use of the term "State Service Commission". So that "appropriate Service Commission" cannot possibly mean the Federal "Public Services Commission".

    Therefore, Edmund Bon is clearly right when he says "the appropriate Service Commission" in Article 52(1) refers to the Selangor State Service Commission and not the Federal Public Services Commission.

    Furthermore, Bon quotes Articles 132 and 139 of the Federal Constitution to say that the jurisdiction of the Public Services Commission does not cover the public service of Selangor unless there is a law that extends its jurisdiction to Selangor.

    Since the State Service Commission of Selangor (by virtue of Article 97(1)) is the appropriate Service Commission and not the Federal Public Service Commission, Khusrin therefore, is not the State Secretary of Selangor as he has not been appointed by the appropriate Service Commission which is the Selangor State Service Commission. Khusrin is a trespasser if he ever comes to work again in the office of the State Secretary.

    There is no doubt about it - Mr. Bon is absolutely right. Khusrin is not the State Secretary of Selangor because he has not been appointed by the State Service Commission of Selangor.

    Is the Selangor Sultan being pretentious when he chose to ignore his own State Constitution and accepted the appointment of the State Secretary from the Federal Public Service Commission?

    The Sultan has no business to do this because he has no such power. He has no prerogative other than that which the law allows. He is being pretentious if he proceeds with the swearing-in of the pretender Khusrin as the State Secretary.

    If he thinks he can rely on Article 52 of the Selangor Constitution then he is sorely mistaken. It was reported in yesterday’s theSun, Wednesday, 5 Jan 2011:

    PETALING JAYA: Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah consented to the appointment of Datuk Mohd Khusrin Munawi as Selangor state secretary as it was in accordance with the constitution and conventions of the state.

    According to the Selangor Constitution, the power to appoint the state secretary lies with the Public Service Commission (PSC), the sultan’s private secretary, Datuk Mohamad Munir Bani, said in a statement.
    He also said this:

    "What actually happened was, the names of candidates for the state secretary’s post were submitted to the sultan by the Public Services Department (PSD), carrying out the federal PSC’s powers, in line with the sultan’s position as the chief executive of the state.

    "The ruler gave his consent on one of the candidates proposed, after which the candidate was agreed upon by the federal PSC through a letter released by PSD and appointed in accordance with Clause 1 and 2(a) under Article 52 of the state constitution," Mohamad Munir said, referring to Mohd Khusrin’s appointment.
    But we all know better because we are now apprised of Article 52 of the Selangor Constitution (see above). We know that the term "the appropriate Service Commission" refers to the Service Commission of Selangor and not to the Federal Public Services Commission.

    How can the palace change the meaning of the words of the Selangor Constitution to mean just what the palace chooses them to mean? You must already know by now that my grouse about our judges is that they act like Humpty Dumpty when they use words in a statute to mean whatever they want them to mean, just like Humpty Dumpty did when he told Alice, "When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean".

    Article 52(3) says, the State Secretary has "the right to take part in the proceedings of the State Executive Council and the Legislative Assembly" and therefore Article 54 applies because it says "no member shall sit … in the State Executive until he shall have taken and subscribed before His Highness … the following oath …".

    But there is no State Secretary yet. He has yet to be appointed by the State Service Commission of Selangor. The one named by the Sultan as the State Secretary is a pretender because he was not appointed by the appropriate Service Commission which is the State Service Commission of Selangor. It cannot be the Federal Public Services Commission as it is not the State Service Commission which is the constitutionally appropriate Service Commission.

    NH Chan, a much respected former Court of Appeal Judge, is a gavel of justice that has no hesitation in pounding on Federal Court judges with wooden desks for heads. Retired from the Judiciary to become the People’s Judge. Wrote the explosive "Judging The Judges", now in its 2nd edition as "How To Judge The Judges". Once famously hinted at a possible "case match" between lawyer and judge by remarking that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (see Ayer Molek Rubber Company Berhad & Ors v Insas Berhad & Anor [1995] 3 CLJ 359 - note solicitors for one party in that case was Messrs VK Lingam & Co). We need more people like NH Chan. That’s why you should buy LoyarBaca’s PASOC and also NH Chan’s book. loyarburok.
    py

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor State Secretary: K-point: Palace’s Codswallop, Sycophants Currying Favour And Bob’s Your Uncle

    K-point: Palace’s Codswallop, Sycophants Currying Favour And Bob’s Your Uncle
    22 January, 2011
    By NH Chan

    Why is the Palace talking codswallop, and who is Bob and the sycophants in the K-point affair?

    Sycophants currying favour

    Fauvel was the French name for the "centaur" (half-man, half-horse) and to keep on the right side of him sycophants would spend time grooming Fauvel. The art of grooming a horse is called "currying". Therefore those seeking to keep in the centaur’s good books were once called "currying Fauvel". Overtime Fauvel became "favour".

    On 7 January 2011, Star reported this at page 2 regarding the appointment of the purported Selangor State Secretary:

    "I am saddened and regret that many of my statements have been manipulated by irresponsible quarters which had caused confusion among the people," said Sultan Sharafuddin.

    The Sultan congratulated Mohd Khusrin on his appointment.
    "I would like to stress that the appointment is in accordance with the regulations and procedures of the Selangor and Federal constitutions".
    But the real truth is that the supposed appointment of Mohd Khusrin as the State Secretary of Selangor is not "in accordance with the regulations and procedures of the Selangor and Federal constitutions" as claimed by the Sultan. Just because these good Samaritans have criticised the appointment of this person on sound constitutional grounds they have been branded as "irresponsible quarters which had caused confusion among the people". In case you do not already know, most of these good people are practising and accomplished lawyers. Amidst the confusion of differing views about the constitutional legality of the appointment of Khusrin, these dedicated and generous lawyers took on the onerous duty of giving gratuitous service to society so as to apprise the lay public on the correct law applicable to the appointment of the State Secretary of Selangor. Because they are not sycophants currying favour they should not deserve such a vile rebuke from the Ruler. You can read their well considered articles at LoyarBurok.

    Bob’s your uncle

    This phrase means something that is resolved in your favour without much effort as in, "just send the form in and Bob’s your uncle". Its real origin comes from the promotion in 1886 of Arthur James Balfour to Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. When it became known he was the nephew of Prime Minister Robert Gascoyne-Cecil, the joke circulated that if Robert was your uncle, the deed or deal is as good as done.

    On 5 January 2011, theSun in its front-page report carried this:

    Royal consent given

    PETALING JAYA: Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah consented to the appointment of Datuk Mohd Khusrin Munawi as Selangor state secretary as it was in accordance with the constitution and conventions of the state.
    So that we know that as a result of royal patronage, Khusrin becomes the Selangor State Secretary and Bob’s your uncle. And the Palace is talking codswallop. What was said by the Palace that the appointment of Khusrin was in accordance with the Constitution and conventions of the State is unbelievable.

    Brass tacks

    Getting down to brass tacks means that we can now get to the heart of the matter. The term is cockney rhyming slang, in which "facts" are dubbed as "brass tacks".

    When it comes to getting down to brass tacks the facts are staring us in the face. We need go no further than Articles 52 and 97 of the Selangor Constitution.

    52(1) There shall be constituted the offices of the State Secretary … and the appointments thereto shall be made by the appropriate Service Commission from amongst members of any of the relevant public services.
    It is as clear as daylight that the appointment of the State Secretary "shall be made by the appropriate Service Commission" from members of any of the relevant public services. What is meant by the term "appropriate Service Commission"? For that we have to look at Article 97 of the Selangor Constitution which says:

    97(1) There shall be established a State Service Commission whose jurisdiction shall … extend to all persons who are members of the public service of the State.
    Article 97(1) confirms that there is in the State of Selangor a State Service Commission which has jurisdiction over all members of the public services of the State. So that "the appropriate Service Commission" in Article 52(1) is the "State Service Commission" referred to in Article 97(1).

    Therefore, by virtue of these two provisions of the Selangor Constitution the State Secretary of Selangor is to be appointed by the State Service Commission of Selangor. The Federal Public Services Commission is not the appointing body for the post of the Selangor State Secretary.

    So that for anyone to say otherwise is codswallop - the word means "nonsense". It is evident nonsense for anyone to say that the Federal Public Services Commission is the appointing body for the post of the State Secretary of Selangor.

    Cock and bull

    A cock and bull story is likely to be untrue and without any real facts supporting it.


    How can the Palace say that the appointment of Khusrin as the State Secretary of Selangor was in accordance with the Constitution of Selangor and conventions of the State? What about Articles 52(1) and 97(1) of the Selangor Constitution then? How can they fly in the face of these two articles of the Selangor Constitution? Without supporting it with any real facts this is just another cock and bull story.

    Perhaps they are mistaking the word "secondment" with "appointment". The verb "second" means to transfer (an employee) temporarily to another branch, or move a worker to another position or role. The noun is "secondment". But there is no provision in the Selangor Constitution for such an eventuality. The Selangor State Secretary can only be appointed by the State Service Commission of Selangor: see Articles 52(1) and 97(1). The office of State Secretary cannot be appointed by anyone else. The Federal Public Services Commission is not authorised by the Selangor Constitution to appoint the State Secretary of the State.

    On the other hand, the Public Services Commission is a commission of the Federal Government and its powers do not extend to cover State Governments like Selangor. However, Article 134 of the Federal Constitution allows the Federal Government to second its civil servants to any State if there is a request for a secondment by a State Government. Since the Selangor State Service Commission had not made any request for a Federal officer to be seconded to the State for the post of State Secretary and the State Government has yet to appoint someone to be its State Secretary, the appointment of Khusrin is clearly unconstitutional.

    Therefore, Khusrin is not the State Secretary because he has not been appointed by the Selangor State Service Commission as required by Article 52(1) of the Selangor Constitution. Conventions or past practices as claimed by the Sultan of Selangor cannot override express and specific provisions of the Selangor Constitution such as Articles 52(1) and 97(1). Any such claim by the Palace is nothing more than a red herring to mislead and confuse what is largely an uninitiated public.

    NH Chan, a much respected former Court of Appeal Judge, is a gavel of justice that has no hesitation in pounding on Federal Court judges with wooden desks for heads. Retired from the Judiciary to become the People’s Judge. Wrote the explosive "Judging The Judges", now in its 2nd edition as "How To Judge The Judges". Once famously hinted at a possible "case match" between lawyer and judge by remarking that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark" (see Ayer Molek Rubber Company Berhad & Ors v Insas Berhad & Anor [1995] 3 CLJ 359 - note solicitors for one party in that case was Messrs VK Lingam & Co). We need more people like NH Chan. That’s why you should buy LoyarBaca’s PASOC and also NH Chan’s book. To read more, see loyarburok.
    py

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor State Secretary: Summary of MB's address on State Constitutional Amendment

    Pengenalan

    Mesyuarat di bawah Peraturan 10(3) Peraturan-peraturan Tetap Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor hari ini diadakan untuk membuat pembentangan bagi mengemukakan pindaan kepada Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor 1959, khususnya Perkara 52(1).

    Ini kerana, tindakan Persekutuan atas tiket Ketua Setiausaha Negara melantik Pegawai Eksekutif Ex-officio dengan membelakangkan Menteri Besar yang dipilih rakyat dan berselindung pula di sebalik istana yang ditaati rakyat adalah amalan salah, menghina kebijaksanaan rakyat dan kedaulatan negeri.

    Pindaan yang dicadangkan hari ini sebagai perubahan supaya generasi akan datang tidak lagi dalam kekaburan dan tiada lagi individu atau puak tertentu yang berani melanggar kuasa negeri atau Sultan.

    Pakatan Rakyat komited untuk menjunjung Perlembagaan baik Perlembagaan Persekutuan mahupun Perlembagaan Negeri yakni Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor. Prinsip-prinsip Rukun Negara dijadikan landasan dalam pentadbiran hari ini.

    Atas prinsip yang sama Pakatan Rakyat komited untuk mempertahankan kedudukan dan peranan Raja-Raja Melayu sebagaimana yang termaktub dalam Perlembagaan.

    Latar belakang krisis Perlembagaan


    Krisis Perlembagaan 1983 berlaku akibat daripada tindakan para pemimpin negara ketika itu, melakukan beberapa tindakan di luar adab dan peruntukan Perlembagaan itu sendiri, dalam lain perkataan membelakangi Raja-Raja.

    Di sinilah bermulanya penghakisan secara terancang terhadap kuasa Raja-Raja di negara ini.

    Perkara 38(4) Perlembagaan Persekutuan berbunyi - “tiada apa-apa undang-undang yang menyentuh secara langsung keistimewaan, kedudukan, kemuliaan atau kebesaran raja-raja boleh diluluskan dengan ketiadaan persetujuan Majlis Raja-Raja”.

    Pemimpin utama ketika itu telah melakukan beberapa tindakan secara rahsia dengan membawa pindaan itu ke Kabinet dan kemudiannya ke Parlimen tanpa terlebih dahulu mendapat perkenan Majlis Raja-Raja.

    Antara pindaan yang berjaya dilakukan ialah Perkara 66(5).

    Peruntukan asal berbunyi “Rang undang-undang akan dikuatkuasakan apabila yang DiPertuan Agung menandatangani”.

    Manakala peruntukan pindaan ialah “Rang undang-undang akan dikuatkuasakan sebagai Undang-undang apabila ditandatangani oleh Yang DiPertuan Agung. Jika di atas apa-apa sebab Rang Undang-undang itu tidak ditandatangani di dalam tempoh 15 hari selepas Rang Undang-undang itu disembahkan kepada Yang DiPertuan Agung, baginda dianggap telah menandatangani Rang Undang-undang tersebut dan Rang Undang-undang itu, berkuatkuasa sebagai Undang-undang”.

    Perkara 10(1), dimana kalau Perdana Menteri mendapati darurat patut diisytiharkan di mana-mana juga di Negara ini maka Perdana Menteri boleh menasihatkan Yang DiPertuan Agung dan Yang DiPertuan Agung mesti menerima nasihat tersebut.

    Perkara 66(4) dan (4A) Jadual Kelapan Perlembagaan Persekutuan – ialah sebuah Rang Undang-undang akan menjadi undang-undang secara automatik selepas 30 hari meskipun baginda tidak memberi perkenan. Kedudukan Raja-Raja di negeri-negeri juga sama sebagaimana yang tertera di bawah seksyen 11(2A) dan (2C).

    Pindaan-pindaan ini menimbulkan banyak persoalan politik dan undang-undang. Ini termasuklah pelanggaran syarat yang dikenakan oleh Perkara 38(4) Perlembagaan Persekutuan di mana ia dengan jelas menyatakan bahawa “Tiada undang-undang yang secara langsung menyentuh keistimewaan, kedudukan, kemuliaan atau kebesaran Raja-Raja boleh diluluskan tanpa persetujuan Majlis Raja-Raja”.

    Perkara 38(4) itulah yang menjadi batu penghalang kepada hasrat mantan Perdana Menteri, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad pada 1983 dan 1993 dan mungkin kerana itulah beliau tidak peduli dan tidak membawa pindaan 1994 itu kepada Raja-Raja.

    Meskipun pindaan 1994 belum dibawa ke mahkamah ada kalangan sarjana undang-undang yang berpendapat bahawa pindaan yang dibuat pada 1994 itu tidak sah kerana melanggar Perlembagaan; khususnya Perkara 38(4) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

    Pindaan yang amat drastik itu sudah dilakukan secara rahsia dan membelakangi Majlis Raja-Raja. Namun, apabila rahsia terbongkar ia ditentang oleh Raja-Raja. UMNO pada ketika itu membuat road show ke seluruh negara mengutuk Raja-Raja.

    UMNO sememangnya sentiasa berdolak-dalik dan tidak konsisten dan acap kali berselindung di sebalik istana apabila berlaku kesempitan politik.

    Peranan Raja, Kerajaan dan Perkhidmatan Awam dalam pentadbiran negeri


    Kedudukan dan peranan Raja-Raja cukup jelas. Mereka adalah Raja Berperlembagaan yang mana Yang di-Pertuan Agong – di peringkat Persekutuan – adalah ketua negara manakala Raja-Raja pula adalah ketua negeri.

    Perdana Menteri dan Menteri Besar pula adalah ketua kerajaan yang dilantik dari kalangan ahli-ahli Dewan. Meskipun mereka dilantik oleh ketua negeri mereka bertanggungjawab kepada Dewan.

    Di bawah kerangka tersebut Menteri Besar dan kabinetnya –yakni Majlis Mesyuarat Kerajaan (EXCO) – mesti bertanggungjawab ke atas segala keputusan dan dasar yang dibuat dan dilaksanakan.

    Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan Raja-Raja tidak dipertanggungjawabkan namun bertindak menurut nasihat. Konsep itu sebenarnya adalah untuk melindungi Istana dari terperangkap dalam kontroversi dan politik.

    Raja-Raja diberi banyak keistimewaan; termasuk peruntukan di bawah Senarai Di Raja (Civil List) yang tidak boleh dikurangkan. Mereka juga mempunyai peranan besar sebagai ketua agama negeri masing-masing. Kuasa pemerintahan atau eksekutif diletakkan secara formal di tangan Yang di-Pertuan Agong dan Raja-Raja.

    Pakatan Rakyat ingin mengembalikan peruntukan yang asal kerana kami yakin bahawa peruntukan itu memberi ruang konsultasi kepada semua pihak; dari istana, suruhanjaya perkhidmatan dan kerajaan negeri untuk memainkan peranan masing-masing secara telus dan terbuka.

    Pindaan yang dibuat oleh Umno pada 1993 – iaitu Perkara 52(1) Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor - begitu ganjil sekali. Ini kerana ia tidak menyebut pihak berkuasa yang diberi kuasa melantik: sepatutnya ada kuasa tertentu yang diletakkan; contohnya sama ada Sultan atau Suruhanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam.

    Jika dibandingkan dengan Perkara 144 Perlembagaan, khususnya Fasal 3, 4 dan 5 yang ada sekarang yang kesemua mempunyai format yang sama dengan peruntukan yang lama dalam Undang- undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor.
    Pindaan 1993 itu tidak sah kerana ia tidak diperkenankan oleh Majlis Raja-Raja sebagaimana yang dikehendakki oleh Perkara 38(4) Perlembagaan Persekutuan.

    Kerajaan negeri juga berpendapat bahawa pindaan Perlembagaan Persekutuan pada 1993 bertujuan menangani isu imuniti Raja-Raja, maka kuasa pelantikan SUK tidak harus disentuh.

    Tidak ada rekod menunjukkan bahawa Raja-Raja setuju dengan pindaan berkenaan kerana yang menjadi pertikaian ketika itu ialah imuniti. Kelihatannya Umno mengambil kesempatan untuk mencuri kuasa Sultan dalam keadaan yang panas dan membingungkan ketika itu.

    Kerajaan negeri berpendapat bahawa peruntukan asal Undand-undang Tubuh Negeri perlu dikembalikan kerana Pakatan Rakyat komited dengan peranan Raja-Raja sebagai salah satu agen semak dan imbang – checks and balances – dalam Perlembagaan.

    Konsep Raja Berperlembagaan bermaksud raja yang kuasa terbatas dan dipandu oleh peruntukan dan semangat Perlembagaan. Umno berpendapat sebaliknya; bagi mereka Raja Berperlembagaan ialah raja yang boleh dicucuk hidung dan diseret ke sana ke mari mengikut kehendak mereka sebagaimana yang mereka lakukan sejak awal 1980an hinggalah sekarang.

    Pindaan yang dicadangkan ini adalah tanda komitmen Pakatan Rakyat untuk mentadbir negeri berdaulat ini menurut aspirasi dan amanah yang diberikan rakyat atas konsep ketuanan rakyat.

    Disediakan oleh
    Sekretariat Akhbar
    Pejabat Dato’ Menteri Besar Selangor
    py

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor State Secretary: PR MENYOKONG PINDAAN MENGEMBALIKAN KUASA SULTAN, BN MENOLAK

    KENYATAAN AKHBAR, 24 JANUARI 2011
    ___________________________________________

    PAKATAN RAKYAT MENYOKONG PINDAAN MENGEMBALIKAN KUASA SULTAN, BN MENOLAK

    Saya ingin menekankan di sini bahawa sidang Dewan Negeri Selangor yang diadakan hari ini bukan sidang tergempar. Mesyuarat ini diadakan di bawah Peraturan 10(3) Peraturan-peraturan Tetap Undang-undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor untuk membincangkan perkara-perkara spesifik, mendesak dan berkepentingan awam. Hari ini Dewan membincangkan pelantikan Setiausaha Kerajaan Negeri yang melibatkan kepentingan awam.

    Saya mengambil kesempatan ini untuk mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Tuan Speaker, Dato Teng Chang Kim dan kakitangan Dewan Negeri kerana berjaya menganjurkan mesyuarat hari ini. Kebijaksanaan dan pendekatan profesional Tuan Speaker telah membimbing satu pembentangan usul yang sihat dan bermanfaat.

    Hari ini Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat Negeri Selangor telah mencipta sejarah apabila semua wakil rakyat Pakatan Rakyat bersatu menyokong cadangan pindaan Undang-undang Tubuh Kerajaan Selangor bagi mengembalikan kuasa DYMM Sultan dan Menteri Besar dalam pelantikan tiga pegawai ex-officio yang telah dimansuhkan selepas pindaan Perlembagaan 1993.

    Dalam pada itu, semua wakil Kerajaan memberi perbahasan baik dan bernas berkenaan satu isu begitu penting kepada rakyat yang gagal disentuh oleh pentadbiran sebelum ini. Perbahasan Pakatan Rakyat hari telah berjaya memartabatkan kesucian Dewan Negeri Selangor dan Eksekutif.

    Ini selari dengan keinginan rakyat Negeri Selangor yang mahukan satu pentadbiran professional bagi dua institusi tertinggi – Dewan dan Eksekutif – yang tidak diamalkan di peringkat Persekutuan.

    Dari asas ini, usul hari ini adalah untuk meminda Fasal 52(1) Undang-Undang Tubuh Negeri Selangor supaya satu prosedur dibuat bagi pelantikan tiga pegawai ex-officio demi memastikan dasar-dasar kerajaan negeri dapat dilaksanakan dengan cekap dan sempurna.

    Kami kesal dengan keputusan wakil-wakil Umno/Barisan Nasional untuk menolak usul ini. Lebih kesal lagi, Barisan Nasional gagal memberikan hujah-hujah yang konkrit dan berkualiti untuk menolak cadangan pindaan ini. Tiada satu pun soalan atau hujah yang kami kemukakan dijawab dengan baik dan professional.

    Jelas, penolakan ini dibuat atas nama politik dan kesetiaan mereka kepada pihak-pihak yang berkuasa di Putrajaya. Sepatutnya sebagai wakil rakyat, keputusan mereka perlulah berdasarkan kepentingan rakyat.

    Penolakan usul juga membuktikan bahawa Umno yang sebenarnya tidak menghormati sama sekali institusi Raja-raja Melayu dan tetap menghalang Raja-raja Melayu daripada memainkan peranan yang sepatutnya dalam institusi Raja Berperlembagaan.

    Sikap hipokrit pihak Umno kini jelas ternampak dalam rekod mereka yang secara konsisten menafikan kuasa Raja-raja Melayu, terutamanya pada tahun 1983, 1993 dan kini, 2011.

    Sidang Dewan hari ini membuktikan pemimpin Umno sebenarnya tidak layak untuk menyentuh soal kedaulatan Raja-Raja kerana belang mereka telah terbongkar. Mereka menuduh Pakatan Rakyat tidak menghormati peranan Raja-raja tetapi sebenarnya Umno yang menghakis kuasa Raja-raja melalui pindaan-pindaan Perlembagaan yang telah dilakukan.

    Walaupun kita mungkin tidak berjaya untuk membuat pindaan, majoriti ahli Dewan telah menyokong. Ini tidak akan mematahkan semangat Pakatan Rakyat. Malah, isu ini telah menguatkan lagi tekad Pakatan Rakyat untuk membuktikan kewibawaan kami dan memperolehi majoriti dua pertiga dalam pilihan raya kelak supaya pindaan ini dapat dibangkitkan semula.

    Kami masih berpendirian bahawa DYMM Sultan Selangor dan Kerajaan Negeri berhak untuk memainkan peranan dalam pemilihan 3 pegawai ex-officio demi memastikan dasar-dasar kerajaan negeri dapat dilaksanakan dengan sempurna.

    Walaupun pihak Persekutuan nampaknya terus mengenepikan suara rakyat Selangor dan enggan menghormati semangat federalisme atau bertemu setengah jalan, Kerajaan Negeri akan berusaha untuk memastikan pentadbiran negeri akan terus dijalankan dengan baik dan selancar mungkin demi kebajikan rakyat Selangor.

    Bersama menjunjung amanah yang diberi oleh rakyat, Kerajaan Pakatan Rakyat akan terus menggandakan usaha untuk melaksanakan tugas dan meneruskan agenda “Merakyatkan Ekonomi Selangor” yang memperjuangkan kebajikan dan kesejahteraan rakyat.

    TAN SRI DATO SERI ABDUL KHALID IBRAHIM

    DATO’ MENTERI BESAR SELANGOR

    --
    Sekretariat Akhbar
    Pejabat Dato' Menteri Besar Selangor
    Tel: 03 5544 7452 Fax: 03 5510 9686
    www.selangorkini.com.my
    www.tvselangor.com
    http://www.youtube.com/user/mbselangor
    py

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor State Secretary: Amendment bid fails: Final score 34-20

    Amendment bid fails: Final score 34-20
    Patrick Lee and Fazy Sahir | January 24, 2011

    As expected, the plan is derailed when all 20 BN state reps voted against amending the Selangor constitution.



    SHAH ALAM: As expected, the Selangor government failed in its bid to amend the state constitution, when all 20 Barisan Nasional reps voted against it.

    Despite Pakatan Rakyat’s 34 reps voting in favour of the amendment, it fell short of a two-thirds majority, which required 38 votes.

    In view of this, Selangor State Legislative Assembly speaker Teng Chang Khim ruled that the amendment could not be made.

    Earlier, newly-minted state opposition leader Satim Diman had dismissed the emergency sitting as an exercise in futility.

    Addressing the House, he said that Mohd Khusrin Munawi’s appointment as the new state secretary was not an issue which required an emergency meeting.

    “We, the 20 BN state assemblymen and one independent state assemblyman (Badrul Hisham Abdullah), will not support these amendments to the state constitution,” he added.

    However, Badrul, a former PKR rep-turned-independent, was barred from attending the meeting since the speaker had declared his Port Klang seat vacant due to him being absent for six months.

    Meanwhile, Satim also claimed that the proposed amendment went against the Federal Constitution, but when quizzed, could not explain how.

    The Pakatan-controlled state government objected to Khusrin’s appointment because Menteri Besar Khalid Ibrahim was not consulted.

    There were also accusations of Khusrin being deliberately placed in the post to engineer the downfall of Pakatan in the state.

    ‘Hypocritical and insincere’

    Following this, the emergency meeting was called to amend the constitution to restore the power of appointment of three top civil servants in Selangor to the state and sultan.

    Satim had also accused the state government of being hypocritical and insincere.

    He said the previous BN state governments never set aside the sultan since the 1993 constitutional amendments, which limited the power of the monarchy and removed their legal immunity.

    Satim also made an issue out of Serdang MP Teo Nie Ching’s speech at the Surau Al-Huda in Kajang Central, and her aerobics exercise at the Taman Cheras Jaya mosque compound in Balakong last year.

    He also asked why the state has to hire two private legal advisers to draw up the amendments, instead of using the state legal adviser at hand.

    The opposition leader also attacked Selangor executive councillor and Pandamaran assemblyman Ronnie Liu over his opposition to the liquor ban.

    After the voting, Satim told reporters that the menteri besar should hold Khusrin’s oath of office as soon as possible.

    Not a waste of time

    Speaking at a press conference later, Teng disagreed with Satim that the sitting was a waste of time.

    “This is a forum for lawmakers to bring forth their views and their motions. In the previous state government, it was a rubber stamp. Everything brought forward was approved,” he said, adding that today’s proceedings were a healthy development.

    The speaker also said that he did not feel pleased or disappointed with the results.

    “As speaker I have to be exempt. I have to make sure that everyone gets his chance to debate, and that the process is fair,” he said.

    Teng also said that the so-called invitation letter given to Port Klang assemblyman Badrul was a meeting notice instead.

    He also added that it was not his responsibility to send a letter to Badrul to inform him of his removal from the assembly.

    “Even at court, the judge can pass judgment, but he won’t send a letter (to the accused regarding the judgment),” he said.

    The speaker also said that the Shah Alam High Court had to make a decision over his ruling on Badrul. The latter had taken the matter to court this morning.

    “Unless my declaration is set aside, the declaration stands,” he said, adding that all of Badrul’s rights and priviliges as an assemblyman had been stopped as of Jan 16. FreeMalaysiaToday....
    py

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor State Secretary: Sultan’s role a smokescreen in clash over Selangor law change

    Sultan’s role a smokescreen in clash over Selangor law change
    By G. Manimaran, Shannon Teoh and Boo Su-Lyn
    January 24, 2011


    Khusrin’s appointment as state secretary is at the centre of the current row. — File pic

    ANALYSIS, Jan 24 — Although the Selangor Sultan will likely be at the centre of debate in today’s emergency sitting, he will neither gain nor lose the power of appointing top state officials whatever the outcome of the proposed constitutional amendments.

    Pakatan Rakyat (PR) and Barisan Nasional (BN) both insist they are on the monarch’s side, but the assembly will only decide if the federally-controlled Public Service Commission (PSC) continues to be the appropriate body to appoint top state officials or PR gets what it wants — the mentri besar having the final say.

    With PR only able to muster 35 assemblymen, short of the two-thirds of the 56-seat assembly required to amend the constitution, it is likely that the status quo will remain.

    All that’s left to be decided is who will score more political points from apparently backing the Sultan.



    Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim has claimed that the amendments will empower the state Ruler.

    But BN, which controls federal government, has accused the PR state government of treason by “trying to share power with the Sultan,” as Selangor Umno deputy chief Datuk Seri Noh Omar put it.

    Selangor proposes to return Article 52(1), that pertains to the appointment of the state secretary, legal adviser and financial officer, to what it was before the 1993 amendments that were effected by BN.

    This will mean that the Sultan will consider the advice of the mentri besar before the appointment.

    Currently, Article 52(1) gives the Sultan no legal role in the appointment process but BN has continued to ask for his consent as was the case with Datuk Mohamed Khusrin Munawi whose appointment by the PSC as state secretary is the cause of the current row.

    The 1993 amendments further added Article 55(1A) which mandates that the Sultan “is to act in accordance” with the state government’s advice.

    PR’s amendment draft, however, makes no mention of any clause besides Article 52(1).

    But PR insists that the Sultan acting on advice is better than the situation now where the Ruler is not involved.

    “Umno’s 1993 amendments took away all the power of appointment from the Sultan. So whatever we are doing cannot make things any worse for the Sultan after what they already did,” argued Kuala Selangor MP Dr Dzulkefly Ahmad.

    State executive councillor Iskandar Abdul Samad told The Malaysian Insider that now, getting the consent of the Sultan was only “a courtesy, not a clear constitutional power.”

    The state PAS deputy commissioner also said that allowing both the Sultan as well as the mentri besar a role in appointments would help whoever will be in power in the future to govern the state.

    Faekah Husin, political secretary to MB Khalid, said that the mentri besar will only have “advisory powers” and the power to appoint would be “shared”.

    She also told The Malaysian Insider that the Sultan’s powers have never been absolute.


    Selangor Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah with Khalid after Khusrin had taken his oath of the loyalty before the Ruler in Shah Alam on January 6, 2011. — File pic

    “The Sultan has never rejected the advice of the mentri besar. This has always been the case,” she said.

    But Umno insists their way is better.

    “The state government is trying to amend the Selangor constitution to give absolute power to the mentri besar with the excuse that it wants to return power to the Sultan,” said state Opposition Leader Datuk Satim Diman in an interview with Utusan Malaysia.

    He added that the Khusrin issue was not about the Sultan’s power being eroded as he had already given his consent.

    “We also want to ask, exactly what kind of power do they want to give the Sultan?” he said.

    Selangor Umno information chief Abdul Shukor Idrus also said that the current arrangement was good and PR’s amendments would make no difference except that the Sultan would need to obtain the advice of the MB.

    But there is indeed a difference between giving the MB or the PSC the power of appointment and each coalition has its obvious preference.

    Lawyers and former judges have also weighed in on the issue and yesterday’s rally to support the Selangor government’s contention will weigh heavily on the debate in the state assembly.
    TheMalaysiaInsider....
    py

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391
    Selangor constitutional change: Winners and losers
    By Shannon Teoh & Boo Su-Lyn
    January 24, 2011


    Khusrin’s appointment on New Year’s Day had thrown the state into a constitutional impasse. — Picture by Jack Ooi
    ANALYSIS, Jan 24 — As expected, Pakatan Rakyat’s (PR) bid to alter the state constitution fell through today.


    PR’s 34 assemblymen could not convince any of their 20 Barisan Nasional (BN) counterparts to go along with the state government’s proposed amendment, which required 38 votes — or two-thirds — of the 56-member assembly.

    If passed, the amendment would have allowed the Sultan — under the mentri besar’s counsel — to appoint the state secretary, legal advisor and financial officer instead of the federally-controlled Public Service Commission.

    Here are some of the winners and losers after today’s verdict:

    WINNERS

    Pakatan Rakyat


    Despite not being able to obtain power of appointment for Mentri Besar Tan Sri Khalid Ibrahim, it will be able to turn the tables on Umno and accuse them of being “derhaka” (treasonous) for not supporting a bill it said would grant the Sultan a constitutional role in the appointment of top state officers.

    They “played a very dangerous game,” said political analyst Khoo Kay Peng.

    “But they will definitely make immediate political gains by exposing Umno’s hypocrisy as champions of the Malay rulers,” he added.

    Look for PR, especially PKR, to make full use of the issue in the Tenang by-election campaign that concludes on January 30.

    The Sultan

    His Royal Highness became “inordinately exposed and ... the subject of political scrutiny,” said opinion research expert Ibrahim Suffian from the Merdeka Center.

    Sultan Sharafuddin Idris Shah had to become involved in the political row several times but made it very clear that the ruler is above politics and always neutral.

    But analysts agree that with both PR and BN looking to position themselves as defenders of the Malay royalty, the Selangor palace has become more influential.

    LOSERS

    Barisan Nasional


    They may have been right to accuse PR of merely wanting to take power for itself, rather than the Sultan, but this will be a case of karma coming back to haunt them.

    PR will attack the Umno-led coalition by bringing doubt and suspicion to Malay voters over BN’s sincerity in supporting the monarchy.

    Just as BN accused PR of not respecting the decision of the Perak Sultan after its coup in 2009, it will also have to face accusations that “by rejecting the amendments, they were rejecting the Sultan,” said Ibrahim.

    Khoo said that this will be difficult as “on the one hand, BN has to say that they were not disrespecting the monarchy but on the other, they will have to answer why they wanted to keep the power of appointment at federal level.”

    Selangor public

    The biggest losers in all of this. For a month the administration has dwelt on the appointment of Datuk Mohd Khusrin Munawi as state secretary and will likely try to find other solutions to the dispute.

    In that period, Selangor witnessed political rhetoric that threatened to add a third “R” as a central socio-political issue.

    With racial and religious sentiments already simmering under the surface, the issue of royalty may in the long run come to the mainstream of Malaysian democracy if politicians continue to harp on it.

    The people of Selangor did not get power returned to the state from the federal government, and instead of having a government and elected representatives who are accountable to the people, “we are seeing them taking several steps back by arguing over who is more loyal to the Sultan,” said Khoo. TheMalaysiaInsider....
    py

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    13,391

    Selangor SUK: Arrest of Seri Muda's Shuhaimi slammed, BN warned of Egypt's example

    Thursday, 03 February 2011 14:32

    Arrest of Seri Muda's Shuhaimi slammed, BN warned of Egypt's example

    Written by Wong Choon Mei, Malaysia Chronicle



    PKR leaders decried the arrest of their colleague, Seri Muda seemblyman Shuhaimi Shafie, who has been released on bail but will be charged for sedition on Monday, advising Prime Minister Najib Razak to learn from Egypt's lesson that oppression was never the way to govern and injustice as overt as this would surely be answered by a people's uprising sooner or later.

    "The authorities can go on using oppressive laws to silence the opposition but as we have seen in Egypt, charging someone under the Sedition Act is a cowardly way to deal with opposition and dissent. There's always a limit and consequences," PKR director of legal affairs Latheefa Koya told Malaysia Chronicle.

    Regaining Selangor through all ways and means

    Police had arrested Shuhaimi on Thursday and charged him under section 4(1) C of the Sedition Act 1948. He was later released him on a personal surety.

    Last month, Shuhaimi was among those who spoke out against Najib's attempt to foist onto the Pakatan Rakyat administration in Selangor his own choice of a state secretary, Khusrin Munawi. Shuhaimi had posted his arguments against the move on his blog and also questioned the Selangor Sultan for allowing Najib to run roughshod over him.

    Najib's Umno party immediately accused the PKR leader of committing treason against the Ruler. The Umno-owned Utusan newspaper also launched a concerted attack against Shuhaimi, and at one time piled so much pressure on him, speculation was rife that the party was trying to 'blackmail' him into defecting from PKR.

    PKR or Parti Keadilan Rakyat is headed by Opposition Leader Anwar Ibrahim and Selangor is Malaysia's richest state. To crush the rising influence of the opposition, Najib has vowed to regain Selangor through all means - fair or foul.

    Khusrin, an Umno stalwart, is widely regarded as his point-man planted into the Selangor state government to lead a revolt using phantom voters in the next election, and if that fails, to stir up unrest with help of a volunteer paramilitary cadre, RELA.

    "This is ridiculous, a clear case of niat jahat or malicious intent. It is obvious the police is working on Umno's orders to harass Selangor and to trigger trouble in the state," PKR vice president Tian Chua told Malaysia Chronicle.

    We must challenge the Sedition Act

    To protest Umno' high-handed action and to show the Malaysian people that they must stand unbowed in the fight to regain their democratic rights, Pakatan leaders in Selangor led by chief minister Khalid Ibrahim tabled a motion in the state legislative assembly. But while they gained 34 votes versus Umno's 20, the motion still failed because state laws require a two-thirds majority from the 56-seat assembly.



    Najib's administration has also been compared to the dictatorships that existed in Tunisia and Egypt. Now, as turmoil unfolds in the Muslim world and despots are being fallen by popular uprising, many Malaysians have already spoken up and forecast a similar trend taking place here.

    Meanwhile, human rights lawyer N Surendran called the charges against Shuhaimi a "disgrace".

    "This is a disgraceful prosecution by the Attorney General. It is politically motivated and oppressive. The AG has once again proven that he is nothing more than an agent of the BN," Surendran, who is also a PKR vice president, told Malaysia Chronicle.

    "I have mounted a legal challenge to the legality of the Sedition Act in the P Uthayakumar case which is now pending before the Court of Appeal. The decision that will be made will have an important bearing on Shuhaimi' case."

    Through the decades, the Umno-led BN government has used a spread of antiquated and draconian laws such as the Sedition Act, the Printing Presses and Publications Act, the Internal Security Act and the Official Secrets Act to control freedom of expression, leash the media and cling to political power. Malaysia-Chronicle....
    py

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Visitors found this page by searching for:

suk selangor

suk approval

nombor telefon menteri besar incorporated selangor

issues of federalism in malaysia-royalties

siapa setiausaha sulit menteri besar selangor

dato suk selangor

menteri besar selangor mohd khalid ibrahim

dato ramli mahmud

suk kerajaan selangor

history on SUK Selangor

setiausaha sulit menteri besar selangor

no. contact pejabat menteri besar incorporated selangor

nombor telepon dato khalid ibrahim menteri besar selangor

suk selangor scholarship 2011

no. telefon menteri besar incorporated

new picher mustufa kamal free download

1957 selangor menteri besar certificates of service

office of menteri besar of selangor malaysia

cara perlantikan suk selangor

no faks pejabat setiausaha politik menteri besar selangor

state secretary of selangor datuk mohd khusrin munawi

can a sultan be appointed as directors

profile datuk khusrin

suk.pahang

Rift between Khalid Ibrahim and sultan

SEO Blog

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •