Inconvenient fact: BN still 5 votes short

Tell them that they are stupid, because two-thirds means two-thirds of 222, not of those present. Bodoh!
Nazri Aziz getting his licks in

Pakatan Rakyat’s tactics of playing for public sympathy by making a hue and cry with doom and gloom stories can get tiresome and annoying when held up against the facts. That seems to be the case with the furore about the Barisan Nasional regaining a two-thirds majority in the Dewan Rakyat by the back-door tactic of suspending four Pakatan Rakyat MPs, which may happen today.

Even if the four are suspended — and there are valid grounds for being angry about that — the Barisan Nasional are still five votes short of the minimum of 148 votes needed to pass a constitutional amendment.

The ploy of pleading Woe Is Us, The End Is Nigh falls flat when viewed against the facts, and Pakatan Rakyat end up looking foolish.

Sure they need to capture headlines, mould public opinion, keep up public sympathy, and portray themselves as the victimised continually under seige, and generally the “good guys”.

But when the facts don’t hold up, the “good guy” image begins to wear thin.

That was the case not just yesterday — but also last month when the Pakatan Raykat made another hue-and-cry about a constitutional amendment in Perak. There, too, they seemed to be crying wolf.

The Pakatan Rakyat fear is that the Barisan Nasional wants to amend the Constitution to increase the number of parliamentary constituencies, and thus improve the BN’s chances at the next general election. Raja Petra Kamarudin, who also buys into the backdoor two-thirds theory, says the Barisan wants to gerrymander some constituencies as well as increase the number of seats.

The number of seats in each state is listed in Article 46 of the Constitution; any change in the numbers requires a constitutional amendment.

For that to happen, the amendment must be passed by two-thirds of the total number of MPs.

Article 159 Clause 3(3)

“

A Bill for making any amendment to the Constitution … shall not be passed in either House of Parliament unless it has been supported on Second and Third Readings by the votes of not less than two-thirds of the total number of members of that House.
» Look it up at Wikisource

That seems clear enough for a layman to understand, let alone experienced parliamentarians and experienced lawyers: and the Pakatan Rakyat is not short of experienced MPs or experienced lawyers, or constitutional experts.

“Tell them that they are stupid, because two-thirds means two-thirds of 222 (seats) not of those present in the house. Bodoh (they are stupid)!” That was law minister Nazri Aziz, quoted by Malaysiakini when asked for his views by reporters. Malaysiakini says he was irate — but he sounds more gleeful than irate, being given a chance to rip apart the Pakatan Rakyat dramatics.

If you don’t like Nazri (and many don’t), you can just look it up instead.

That’s all it needed, a cool head on the Pakatan side to check the constitution first, instead of instantly reaching for the calculator as Nizar Jamaluddin and Liew Chin Tong (among others) did on Twitter.

There are 222 seats in the House. A constitutional amendment requires at least 148 votes in favour.

The Barisan Nasional has 137 seats plus the likely votes of the six friendly defector independents: a total of 143.

They are five votes short.

Pakatan Rakyat has 76 seats plus the likely votes of three other friendly independents: a total of 79. If four Pakatan Rakyat MPs are suspended today, there would still be 75 available for ordinary business.

But the Barisan Nasional is still five votes short on constitutional business.

This is not the first occasion that Pakatan Rakyat legislators have monkeyed around on constitutional matters, Last month at the Perak state assembly, much noise was made about the state government amending the state constitution by resolution, without a two-third majority.

What the Pakatan Rakyat doom-and-gloom team failed to point out to the public was that the Sultan of Perak was perfectly within his rights to make amendments on matters concerning the royal household. These are not new powers — they were written into the constitution from the beginning, about a century ago.

It’s tiresome enough to hear the bozos of the Ketuanan Melayu crowdshouting about upholding a “right” that does not exist in the constitution, or their sudden desire to cherish a much tattered document, the Constitution having suffered 600 or so amendments over the past 50 years, or to hear the outlandish cries of a “sacred” constitution.

That the most rabid and devout supporters of Umno’s precious Ketuanan Melayu doctrine (™ Abdullah Ahmad Kok Lanas, sole proprietor) have probably never read the Constitution is understandable. Ignorance is bliss, in their eyes.

Must we also plead ignorance on the part of Pakatan Rakyat, they who wear the halo of reform and change?

Are they reformers, or thespians?

courtesy of uppercaise