Making sense of the Perak impasse and its implications — Ivanpal S. Grewal

The Perak episode threatens to unravel the BN more than it seeks to give the BN a much needed boost. Only time will tell. It has also set a dangerous precedent for future power-grabbing exercises.

Ivan S. Grewal, The Malaysian Insider

The Barisan Nasional’s supposed triumphant return to power in Perak — through subterfuge — has blighted the much touted resurgence of the BN after the humbling of March 8, 2008.

After the 12th general election, I wrote an article entitled “Wake up, Barisan Nasional” and part of my article included the following words: "It is now that he (Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad Badawi) can truly show his passion for change, and rid the BN of its warlords, its opaqueness, and, most importantly, of its seeming tolerance towards everything that is wrong with the country. This is a mandate for change on all sides. BN needs to face this new reality and rejuvenate. It is only then that they can remain relevant."

However some 11 months later, the BN is still yearning for direction and cohesiveness. Certain quarters have retreated to their comfort zones and in doing so have adopted a centrifugal direction in their politics and politicking.

The deputy prime minister spearheaded the enticing of three Pakatan Rakyat assemblymen and, with that, the BN has now regained its majority in the Perak state assembly and Pakatan Rakyat is now formally the opposition.

However the democratic legitimacy of such an action is far from clear.

Much consternation and disbelief has met Sultan Azlan Shah's refusal to dissolve the state assembly and allow the people to decide who best to lead them.

When Sultan Azlan Shah received the request for dissolution, I am certain he was operating under the assumption that Datuk Seri Nizar Jamaluddin no longer commanded majority support in the state assembly as stipulated by Article 16 of the Perak State Constitution.

This was due to the four assemblymen previously aligned to Pakatan Rakyat switching their support and deciding to caucus with the BN. However, if you were to throw the validity of the resignations of the three Pakatan assemblymen (Changkat Jering, Behrang and Jelapang) then you further complicate the issues because it has been previously established that undated resignation letters are contrary to public policy.

Assuming the resignations are valid, then a split in the state assembly can be construed as an impasse, and new elections would be the best way to resolve the matter.

I take exception to the decision of Sultan Azlan Shah because, in order to determine the level of confidence enjoyed by the menteri besar, the best way forward was to convene a special sitting of the state assembly and allow the opposition (BN) to move a motion of no confidence against the menteri besar and his executive council. If they were to succeed then Sultan Azlan Shah can accept the loss of confidence and call for his resignation or dissolve the assembly and allow the menteri besar to take his case to the people.

The beauty of a constitutional monarchy is that the Rulers are bound by the constitution, ensuring that the supremacy and the primacy of the people and their role as the ultimate deciders is not tarnished or subverted in any way.

After the eruption of the present constitutional quagmire, it has been a snafu for Pakatan Rakyat as it has been either overturned or outmanoeuvred at every turn.

However, the BN despite regaining the state government some 11 months after spectacularly losing the state to an unofficial coalition of opposition parties has to now endure the abhorrence and scorn that comes with such a perceived underhand and unscrupulous method of taking power.

The justification of some BN leaders that they did not start or initiate this concept of crossing over or “kataking” is not only hollow but most unwise. After March 8, 2008, a resurgent Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim threatened to topple the Federal BN government by engineering mass defections. The symbolic date of Sept 16 was chosen to underpin the kingmaker position occupied by Sabah and Sarawak lawmakers.

He failed in an equally spectacular fashion but not without having the BN running scared like never before and even having certain MPs packed off to Taiwan for a lawatan sambil belajar.

The BN cried foul and vehemently protested the power grab. Via this painful episode — which caused much instability both economically and politically — the BN claimed the moral high ground with some of its senior members even postulating an anti-hopping law.

However the BN may have never wanted such a law in the first place because it would defeat its ability to replace the Pakatan state governments without having to go through an election.

But the sympathy the BN garnered after the failure of Anwar's takeover plan has all but withered away after the BN seized control of Perak much to the chagrin of ordinary Perakians and Malaysians.

I have little sympathy for Anwar and PKR, however I have all the sympathy in the world for average Perakians who collectively voted for a new government only to have it taken away by four unprincipled politicians.

The BN has now risked its reformation and rejuvenation by its latest escapade in Perak, and any moral ground that it chipped away from Pakatan Rakyat has disgorged to the opposition coalition. The BN was supposed to be different and more principle after March 8, 2008.

It promised to govern with the highest ethical standards and not subvert the wishes of the people. However by removing a popular state government by by-passing the ballot-box, it can be said that the BN has shown its old colours; the colours many Malaysians thought withered away after the last drubbing at the polls.

If the BN continues to harp on the “I did not start it” contention, it risks the continued support and confidence of the people as the old adage goes: two wrongs do not make a right.

Also, if Anwar were to get the requisite number of defectors to join his Pakatan Rakyat coalition, then all he has to do is to seek an audience with the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and convince His Royal Highness that he has the numbers. We do not need a special parliamentary sitting to confirm the government's loss of confidence, nor does the King need to accede to the government's request for the dissolution of Parliament.

The Perak episode threatens to unravel the BN more than it seeks to give the BN a much needed boost. Only time will tell. It has also set a dangerous precedent for future power-grabbing exercises.

With two by-elections that will be cast as a referendum on the BN some one year after its dismal performance during the 12th general election, I am certain that the provability of the contention that its recent return to power in Perak enjoys the popular support of Malaysians will be very much in doubt.

If the BN were to lose both the by-elections, which at this point does not seem so far-fetched, its claim to command plural support may be diminished as it would have lost four by-elections in a row.

As the clock ticks, our leaders fiddle; luckily for Malaysia, we are not yet burning but I would not dare even take that for granted.

Ivanpal S. Grewal is an analyst with Sedar Institute. The views reflected herein are a personal observation. The writer laments the lack of support for ethical governance in Malaysia.