Tuesday, May 26, 2009

PENGHAKIMAN 5-MINIT:ANALISIS NH CHAN

Assalamualaikum,

NH Chan, seorang bekas hakim, membuat analisis kenapa penghakiman 5-minit mahkamah rayuan salah:


Nizar’s case was that Article XVI(6) speaks of “If the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly”. The poser is who is to decide “If the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly” under Article XVI(6)? Certainly not the Ruler because the phrase “in his judgement” - which is used in Article XVI(2)(a) - is not used in Article XVI(6). If it is not to be the Ruler then who is to decide “If the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Legislative Assembly”? The answer is in Article XVI(6) itself - only the Legislative Assembly itself could decide if the Mentri Besar ceases to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly.


Silapnya terletak pada frasa pada penilaian baginda. Dalam artikel 14(2)(a) yang bertujuan untuk melantik menteri besar, frasa tersebut ada. Dalam artikel 16(6), frasa tersebut tidak ada.

Jadi, untuk melantik MB, sultan boleh guna budibicara baginda. Untuk memecat, DUN mestilah menentukan MB telah hilang majoriti.

NH Chan pun hanya faham bila baca penghakiman bertulis hakim mahkamah tinggi Hakim Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahim setebal 78 muka surat.

Kalau nak tunjuk pandai dalam masa 5 minit je, superman pun konpius!