by Hannah Yeoh

To those who argue that the political crisis in Perak now is a taste of
Pakatan's own medicine (referring to the Sept 16 takeover plan), they have
failed to see the key differences between the two. If you remember what
happened when Dato' Seri Anwar Ibrahim claimed to have the numbers to form
the new federal government, he wrote to PM Datuk Seri Abdullah Ahmad
Badawi requesting him to convene an emergency sitting of Parliament. This
was rejected by the PM. The next constitutional option is to press for the
dissolution of Parliament to make way for fresh new elections. That was
also not entertained. Anwar Ibrahim exhausted the constitutional means
that were available to him. If Pakatan were to act unconstitutionally and
lure defections, then we will be having a new government today . But we
didn't and we will not act unconstitutionally. So you can't say that
Najib's coup and Pakatan's plan were one and the same.

Some may also say, well what about the earlier defection of Bota
assemblyman, Datuk Nasarudin Hashim? Why did Pakatan Rakyat accept him?
Why not force his seat to be vacated for a by-election? Let's keep things
in perspective here. His defection was that of an opposition lawmaker to a
governing lawmaker. His defection did not alter the balance of power in
the State Assembly. Pakatan Rakyat remained as government, and BN as
opposition. Status quo. Logically and intelligently, anyone can safely
assume that Pakatan Rakyat didn't need a defection from BN. Thus, he
defected on his own accord and on his own will. There was no need for
Pakatan Rakyat to force him to vacate his seat as he did not win the seat
on a Pakatan ticket. The Pakatan government really has no standing in
forcing him to vacate a seat which wasn't earned by Pakatan in the first
place!

I must say that I had great respect for Sultan Azlan Shah. Until
yesterday. I wonder how he could possibly consent to the formation of a
new BN state government when constitutionally, a government is still in
place. And to even approve to a new Menteri Besar when the existing one is
still in office? How can any state have 2 heads of government at any one
time? There can only be one Menteri Besar of Perak. This is a mockery. The
Menteri Besar can only be removed by the State Assembly via a vote of
no-confidence or via the dissolution of the assembly. And none of these
two constitutional means has been requested by BN. How can anyone claim
that Najib and Anwar are one and the same?

Next, the Sultan called for a "unity" government to be formed by BN and
the Independents. Let's be clear about this. The Independents are in no
way legally bound to represent BN. Well, at least not yet, not till they
officially become members of a BN component party. All that the Sultan and
Najib has from them is a verbal assurance that "we will be friendly to
BN".. And just by appearing in a press conference with Najib, it justifies
the change of government? What if next week these Independents were to be
seen in a press conference with Pakatan? A real "unity" government
envisioned by the Sultan should have been an all-inclusive government of
Pakatan, BN, and the Independents. Pakatan and BN each have 28 seats, and
the Independents 3. Thus, no single party or coalition has a commanding
majority. If there is to be a "unity" government, it calls for a new
coalition of PR-BN-Ind which is impossible. Thus, what the Sultan has
called for is simply a name without substance. What "unity" if it's going
to consist of only single-minded representatives - all "friendly to BN"?
That's not a "unity" government, it's a BN government. This is a mockery
of the intelligence of Malaysians. A beginning of what is to come with
this PM-to-be.