Sultan has no powers to ask Nizar to quit

NH CHAN is former Court of Appeal judge.
He gave his verdict on the Constitutional Crisis in Perak.
His article is too long and complicated for most normal person to read.
So I shall attempt to summarize it up for all my friends!

According to the Perak constitution, the ruler has a personal discretion in the performance of two functions : - This is provided for in Article XVIII, Clause (2)
- the appointment of a menteri besar and
- the withholding of consent to a request for the dissolution of the legislative assembly.

On Feb 4, Mohd Nizar had an audience with the sultan to seek the ruler's consent to dissolve the state assembly.

However earlier in the day, Najib, who is Perak Barisan chairman, had an audience with the sultan twice.

Later Mohd Nizar was summoned to an audience to be informed of the sultan's decision not to dissolve the state government.

Now what is wrong with that?
It is wrong because the sultan saw Najib without Mohd Nizar being present.

As a former Lord President, who was then the highest judge in the country, the sultan should know that it is improper to see an interested party alone without the other side being present before announcing his decision.

That was his undoing. It was a fatal error. This is not a case of natural justice where both sides have a right to be heard. BUT there was no hearing.

The personal discretion to grant or not to grant (for dissolution of the State Assembly) must be exercised without any suggestion or suspicion to any reasonable outsider that he was partial to one political party or coalition of parties.

In other words, it is about the appearance of impartiality - justice should not only be done, but should be seen to be done.

It is very sad that Sultan Azlan Shah, who had been held in high esteem internationally and by the populace, has, in a careless moment, lost all that.

His reputation for fairness and justice has been shattered when they go away thinking that he had been influenced by Najib or that he has favoured BN. It does not matter whether he did, in fact, favour one side unfairly.

Suffice it that reasonable people might think that he did. The die is cast and we cannot put the clock back. Hereafter, there may be many who will no longer believe in his speeches on good governance and the integrity of the judiciary.

The impression is that he does not practise what he preaches.

When the menteri besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the legislative assembly, he has two choices.

First, he may request the ruler to dissolve the assembly for the purpose of a state election. Second, if his request is turned down by the ruler, "he shall tender the resignation of the executive council”
This is provided in Article XVI, Clause (6).

The sultan is a constitutional monarch who has no power to rule except a couple of discretionary powers mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2). (see above)

So, apart from the couple of matters mentioned in Article XVIII, Clause (2), the Sultan of Perak has no power to order Mohd Nizar to resign from his post as Perak menteri besar together with the members of the state executive council with immediate effect.

Nor has he the power to declare that the posts of menteri besar and state executive councillors are regarded as vacant.
(However this was exactly what the Sultan did!!)

The ruler has defied the provisions of Article XVI, Clause (6) when he resorted to ordering the menteri besar to resign from his post when he has no power to do so.

To read the full article please go to Malaysiakini website!