The Perak Crisis – my rebuttal to Lord Lester’s opinion
ART HARUN
Prologue
"To adopt a literal approach would vest a certain level of absolute power in the Ruler where such power does not exist in the first place. Can we imagine a situation where the Ruler may decide mid-term to change an MB because he thinks that MB does not command the confidence of the majority anymore?"
The above was part of my comment at Malik Imtiaz's blog, Disquiet, on his article Crisis In Trengganu? What Crisis? That comment was posted on March 25th last year, when the whole nation was discussing the crisis in Terengganu and Perlis, where the Rulers in both states had refused to agree to appoint the candidate nominated by the leadership of the winning party as the Menteri Besar.
There was a populist school of thought then that the Rulers were well within their power to do so. I took a different stand. I had always thought that the notion of "absolute power" rested in the Rulers is, with respect, misconceived. I ended my comment with a word of caution:
"But lets not allow our emotion to colour our judgement by creating, or allowing to create, a dangerous precedent, a precedent which we all may live to regret later."
Fair enough, what I said above has now become true. His Royal Highness the Sultan of Perak had decided in mid-term to change the MB because HRH thinks that the previously appointed MB did not command the confidence of the majority anymore.
