Must Read ! A Government That Was Forced Down the Throats of the People of Perak

Read here article "A Government Not Elected, But Imposed" in the The Aisehman blog

A Government Not Elected, But Imposed

by

"The Aisehman"

(The following) things (were) said in Perak just a few days ago:

".. The Ruler, as the head of state and country, needs to be neutral, non-partisan and free of having personal interest to ensure justice for the people, says the Raja Muda of Perak Raja Dr Nazrin Shah. He said:

“As the head of state at the state level and head of the country at the national level, the Ruler plays a role in upholding stability and justice, and strengthening solidarity and unity.

The presence of the Ruler helps in enhancing the effectiveness of the check and balance mechanism, thus strengthening the institutions of the legislature, executive and judiciary that have been created in the country; lifting the level of public confidence in the system of government and system of nationhood based on democratic practices, and the doctrine of the division of power.”

… Referring to his father, Sultan Azlan Shah, Raja Nazrin said his father clearly understood the sentiments and aspirations of his subjects.

“The height of the throne has never caused my father to ignore the welfare of his subjects; the fence surrounding the palace has never prevented my father from seeing the reality occurring in the state.” [Read here for more in The Star]

It follows then that the sentiments and aspirations of his subjects — all his subjects and not just the ones who voted for or support Barisan Nasional — :

• Must be that they want to see Barisan Nasional in power in Perak.
  
  
• Must be then that the welfare of all his subjects are best served by a Barisan Nasional government.
  
  
• Must be then that the reality occuring in the state was that all his subjects were being poorly-served by the Pakatan Rakyat, and that Barisan Nasional would make things right.

If so, I wonder:

1. WHY Barisan Nasional LOST Perak after decades in power.
   
   
2. IF anyone has asked the Sultan’s subjects — all his subjects — WHAT their sentiments and aspirations are.
   
   
3. IF anyone has asked them IF their welfare is being looked after.
   
   
4. And what they see as the REALITY ocurring in the state.

Wait a minute … THEY WERE ASKED THESE QUESTIONS .

There was an election last year in Perak. And the Sultan’s subjects answered them ALL.

With all the turmoil occuring in the state since the general election, there was an opportunity to ask them AGAIN

However, the Sultan seems to have chosen to answer those questions on his subjects’ behalf.

I would hesitate to ask WHY, as the Sultan need not answer to anyone:

1. IF THE ultimate objective is to uphold stability and lift public confidence in a system of government and system of nationhood based on democractic practices, wouldn’t changes of government via elections be preferable over changes of government via defections?
   
   
2. Shouldn’t the people get a government they ELECT , rather than one that is IMPOSED upon them, especially when there is an avenue to allow the people to elect a new government?

IT IS written that under normal circumstances, it is taken for granted that the Yang di-Pertuan Agong would NOT withhold his consent to a request for dissolution of parliament. His role is purely formal.

Also, NO Yang di-Pertuan Agong or Sultan has withheld consent to dissolve the legislative body, except in Kelantan in 1977.

Maybe such things ONLY apply to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

Maybe these are not normal circumstances.

In any case, it’s time to update the book, and add Perak 2009 to Kelantan 1977.