Posts Tagged ‘Quorum’

Guan Eng: Local elections under EC’s purview Thursday, February 2, 2012 – 22:14 by Llew-Ann Phang

In Election Commission, Justice, Law, Malaysia on February 2, 2012 at 7:13 pm

GEORGE TOWN: It is the Election Commission’s (EC) responsibility to conduct local government elections, says Penang Chief Minister Lim Guan Eng.

He reiterated this in response to a recent statement by the commission’s chairman, Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Mohd Yusof, who had said Penang and Selangor could hold local elections should they want to, but without the EC’s involvement.

“If we do this, we will be going against the law because the Elections Act is still being enforced. This falls under federal law and we must comply and uphold this.

“We must practise what we preach, so we must comply. Let’s not break the law.We don’t want to jeopardise the legality of the councillors or decisions of local councils,” Lim told a press conference at the state administrative complex in Komtar, yesterday.

When told about alternative ways in which councillors could be elected, at non-governmental organisation or Rukun Tetangga levels and then appointed to Penang City Council or Seberang Perai Municipal Council posts, he said: “Let’s not take these things lightly. We want to hold proper elections.”

He said the state had sought constitutional lawyers’ help and advice, and was making an application seeking a declaration for the EC to conduct local elections.

“We do not want the legality of decisions made by councils and councillors questioned. These are some of the realities we have to face.

“If we were the federal government, we could amend the law, but we are governed by the federal law, and so we have engaged lawyers for this purpose.

“(Former prime minister) Tunku Abdul Rahman had said once peace is restored, local government elections (which ceased to be practised in the 1960s) will be restored and it is our hope this will come to pass.”

The Penang government has instructed the state legal adviser to issue a gazette notification exempting local authorities there from Section 15 of the Local Government Act 1976 as a precursor to seeking a court declaration to compel the EC to conduct local elections.

“This is something that will take time but it is in the process of being done,” said Lim.

Citing a previous letter to the EC, he said the commission replied it was impossible to hold local elections in adherence to the same provision, resulting in the Local Government Elections Act to be of no force and effect.

“Clearly, the Local Government Elections Act authorises the EC to conduct elections for local authorities in Malaysia.

“It is, therefore, perplexing that the EC chairman continues to refuse to conduct local government elections in Penang as it is the only legal authority empowered to carry out the elections.

“The state has no choice but to seek a court declaration compelling the EC to obey and abide by the state’s directives.”


[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Wheres all that attitude when hurling meaningless ill aimed insults that waste the taxpayer’s money in Parliament? If the EC is doing something illegal by UN standards, it is up to people like YB CM Lim Guan Eng to take up the issue and file lawsuits, not accede as if nothing can be done. We are living in a global village now, not a Penangite Tempurung. Are you sure you’re the right man for the job of Chief Minister? Who voted you in as Chief Minister? Oh right, Guan Eng’s dad ‘golden parachuted’ Guan Eng there.

In a one man one vote system (1.5 million Penangites vote at 66.6% minimum quorum, like the USA’s presidential vote) which DAP has no capacity to conceptualise (like the cave man before fire), Lim Guan Eng would very likely not even be on the EXCO in Penang. Try quorums and direct democracy, probably 75% of DAP’s ‘Supremos’ including Guan Eng and dad Kit Siang would be kicked out immediately being based on nepotism and oligarchy (also limitless terms) than anything else.

Complain to the ‘UN Commission for Election Practices’ or what not, don’t tell us it’s entirely up to the EC – the EC is still run entirely by vested interest politicians placed there by the BN coalition. This lack of PR coalition or even non-political party affiliated representation in the EC has not even been mentioned by Guan Eng to the UN in the context of stating the EC’s actions as purely biased and thus getting UN to require the EC to place Opposition and neutral non-party panellists in the EC. The UN can well get NATO to breathe down Libya and Tunisia and now Syria’s necks about election problems, so Malaysia should be no different. More like a crypto-lapdog waiting for 750K funds, why aren’t you doing this yet Guan Eng, new leadership is needed if you go ‘. . . ho hum EC decides everything . . . ‘ and go back to sleep  . . . you call yourself an opposition leader or even minority race leader?

The year the government repeatedly changed its mind – MalaysianInsider – 31 December 2011

In Uncategorized on January 12, 2012 at 5:34 pm
KUALA LUMPUR — A growing public demand for accountability forced the government this year to make many about-faces and policy U-turns, characterising what critics would say was a weak administration but supporters might call responsive management. And voters will get to eventually decide if they want to punish or reward Barisan Nasional (BN) when Datuk Seri Najib Razak calls elections. The Malaysian Insider reviews some of the year’s notable changes in position and direction. Bersih 2.0 rally The first Bersih rally in 2007 was credited with shrinking the ruling coalition’s voter support in Election 2008 that led to Tun Abdullah Ahmad Badawi’s early exit from government and his successor, Najib, appeared keen to avoid a repeat. The Najib administration initially moved to nip the problem in the bud by detaining several individuals campaigning for the July 9 rally on suspicion of security risks to King and country and banning T-shirts bearing the images of communists as well as yellow-coloured clothes. But days before the street march in the capital city, the Yang di-Pertua Agong stepped in to calm the rising storm and the seventh prime minister softened the government’s stance against Bersih 2.0, led by lawyer-activist Datuk Ambiga Sreenevasan, and offered the 62-member coalition the use of a stadium of choice for its rally demanding a cleaner and more transparent electoral system. When the electoral reform movement demanded Stadium Merdeka, Najib said he meant the Shah Alam stadium in Pakatan Rakyat-controlled Selangor, leading to yet another stalemate. The 72 hours leading to the rally became fuzzy as misinformation reigned.
City police issued a lockdown on the capital and got a court order barring entry to 92 individuals, including the movement’s leaders. However, videos of harsh police action against the peaceful protestors went viral online and through social media channels such as Facebook and Twitter. Faced with global criticism, the government conceded it may have mishandled the incident. PSC electoral reform On August 15, five weeks after the July 9 rally, Najib announced the set up of a bipartisan Parliamentary Select Committee (PSC) on electoral reform, addressing Bersih 2.0’s eight demands. But the very next day, Najib’s deputy Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin said the PSC would only fine-tune and not reform the electoral processes. It was not the first time Muhyiddin had voiced a different view from his boss, raising questions of unity within the Najib Cabinet. The PSC kicked off its public hearings for feedback on November 11, and several recommendations have been made since. The Election Commission has endorsed recommendations like indelible ink for the next general election. Bumiputera quota Pro-Bumiputera quotas remain as part of the government’s economic policies.
On September 27, Najib said, “We want to do away from (with) quotas but we must support them (Bumiputera entrepreneurs) in a way that would allow them to grow” in a bid to calm growing unhappiness with the affirmative action plan that favoured one community. After suggestions that the PM had decided to abolish quotas, Najib clarified three days later: “I did not say we want to abolish quotas, but I said we cannot be too reliant on them”. National Feedlot Corp scandal It started off with Najib being firmly with Women, Family and Community Development Minister Datuk Seri Shahrizat Jalil, after story broke that her family members had been very liberal with the use of a RM250 million soft loan to a National Feedlot Corporation. The company was set up to reduce Malaysia’s dependency on foreign beef. However the pasture for the company extended as far as Bangsar condominiums and other baffling purchases. As the attacks grew on Shahrizat’s CEO husband, Umno’s resolve to defend its Wanita Umno chief weakened, as did the reluctance of the authorities to investigate the case. Police and the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Agency eventually started investigations after seeing widespread public dissatisfaction. Peaceful Assembly Act/Bill 2011 On the eve of Malaysia Day on September 16 Najib went on live television and promised the end of oppressive laws such as the Internal Security Act, Banishment Act and a slew of laws used to suppress political dissent. There was a collective sigh of relief, but within days his cousin Hishammuddin announced that there would be new laws to fill the void. On November 24, as a show of progress since Bersih 2.0, the Peaceful Assembly Bill was tabled. It was pilloried instantly by legislators, and citizens were not far behind. Critics said the new law, despite its name, would create more restrictions on the right of the public to assemble than the laws it would be replacing. The government was forced to modify part of the law but many social activists and opposition politicians remain unhappy with the legislature that was eventually passed by Parliament. -themalaysianinsider
[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]
This article went : ‘ And voters will get to eventually decide if they want to punish or reward Barisan Nasional (BN) when Datuk Seri Najib Razak calls elections. ‘ Nothing against Najib here (other issues like APARTHEID notwithstanding) but how is it that the 99.999% cannot decide but 1 man decides when to call elections? MPs who want to be voted, need to change the law to allow the voters to decide when to call for elections rather than the PM or at least for the MPs at 66.6% quorum to decide when to call elections. Democracy means 66.6% quorums not a one man decision! Another dated law aspect of constitution to be amended! bar Council, still not hitting the books yet? What is Bar Council doing about constitutional things like these, much less neurotech abuse of citizens much less Section 377B, and University Colleges Act, Printing Presses Act? March around then hide and hope it blows over? Do you know how long the APARTHEID issue has been addressed by some of us that Bar Council dare not even touch on?