UPDATED! Ex-Judge Says Selangor Royal Palace Misled Malaysians on Constitutionality of the State Secretary's Appointment

Read here for more on Loyar Burok website

Quote

"... Article 97(1) of the Selangor State Constitution 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).

The SELANGOR State Secretary can ONLY be appointed by the State Service Commission of Selangor

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.

The Public Services Commission is a commission of the FEDERAL Government and its powers do NOT extend to cover State Governments like Selangor.

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?

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...."
-N.H. Chan

Palace’s Codswallop, Sycophants Currying Favour

Read here for more on Loyar Burok website

by

NH Chan
(NH Chan is a former Court of Appeal Judge. He wrote "Judging The Judges", now in its 2nd edition as "How To Judge The Judges". )

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.

What was said by the Palace that the appointment of Khusrin was in accordance with the Constitution and conventions of the State is unbelievable

The Selangor State Constitution

Articles 52 and 97 of the Selangor Constitution states:

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.

Selangor Royal Palace's Cock and Bull

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.

Khusrin is NOT the State Secretary by Selangor State Constitution

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.


RELATED ARTICLE

The Sultans: No More Relevant?

by

"Steadyaku47"

Read here for more

Does anyone in politics, whether in the government or in the opposition, have the backbone to say that our country needs the Sultans like we would need a hole in our head?

Or is this a side issue only for the Malays to decide? I say “NO.”

If the money to upkeep them comes from everybody pockets then EVERYBODY has a say!

There have been many discussions about the relevance of Ketuanan Melayu in the times that we now live in….…should there not be a corresponding discussions on the relevance of the Sultans…or do I have to start it?

Of course there is political cowardice on this issue because anybody prepared to go there will lose votes most probably from some Malays and Chinese Latuks too – who will vote to keep the Sultans around for a few more years simply because they like bowing and kissing the hands of other human beings to acknowledge that these human beings are superior then them.

The questions I would like to ask them are this:

How are THEY a better human being then us?

Can somebody tell me WHY WE should keep these “almost rich”, idle and unelected individuals in their Palaces and riding around in Rolls Royce’s that we pay for?

As I see it they have the same value as a Paris Hilton.

They give the media good copy by their sexual high jinks and “entertain” us by the bad behaviour of the Sultans and their families. At least with Paris Hilton she is good to look at….what redeeming features have these Sultans have?

They are a sorry excuse as symbols of Malay supremacy no longer play a role in conflict resolution or conflict prevention.

Hell for most of the time THEY are the reasons for the conflicts.

I can see few hands being raised in disagreement with me!

I am being told that the Sultan of Perak had a role in taking back Perak from the DAP (good for the Malays!)

The Sultan of Selangor, when he is not too busy making money or socializing with u-know-who does his bit to keep PKR on their toes in Selangor.Good for UMNO.

There was a game of musical chairs in the state of Kelantan recently which saw a son disposing off his father “for the good of the state” – no mention of the good it did to him by appointing himself Sultan – always it is for the people and the State.

The Pahang Sultan is great at public relations for himself but is really a pain the arse – for the state and federal government. If he not asking for more timber concessions and other business goodies he is off sowing his wild oats wherever he can. A Timber concessions here and a daughter there….very busy Sultan.

And something did just occur to me. These Sultans are not gender friendly. How come there are no Female Sultans? What would they call female Sultans anyway? Sultanee?

What are the duties and importance of our traditional rulers or royals?

If we are to trace back the lineage of these “Royals”, the truth will out them to be really no more then pirates or a happy accident of history and questionable British decisions in their Nation Building exercise.

There really is no “Royal” lines. They are as “Royal” as me, Yap Ah Loy or for that matter that Mamak from Kerala.

If truth were told they did not gain prominence and wealth through conquest of other men or state.

Their air of superiority and self-importance was gifted to them by the British and by the self-serving needs of UMNO.

In return for being Sultan they have given up territories, cede their powers to the British, the Japanese and to UMNO just so that they could continue to live a decadent live financed by the Nations coffers.

Name me one Sultan that cares for the welfare of their subjects?

I do not count riding in motorcycles convoy to visit their subjects, descending from the skies in a helicopter and throwing them a few bags of rice and groceries after floods and attending “meet and greet” get together in their state as showing concern for the welfare of their subjects.

If anything every time they move anywhere causes problems and further hardship for their subjects.

Police escorts are required to move them in a convoy, their subjects are pushed aside to allow them clear access to wherever important that they are going to – money, people and time are wasted to make these Sultans think that they are what they are: SULTANS!

And all others, including me, are call commoners?

Why, these sultans are born into this earth “ROYALS?”

Or was there a definitive period in their life when they became “ROYALS?”

When? When their ancestors stopped being pirates and settled down? Or when they cede Singapore to the British?

I stand to be challenged, corrected or refuted by anyone who disagrees with me – but really this Sultan issue need to be debated and the people allowed to decide the relevance of the Sultans in the times that we live in now.
-"steadyaku47"