Former Negeri Sembilan MB Aminuddin Harun says the public deserves to know why the current MB signed a proclamation that he refused to sign months earlier.

Ismail said yesterday that the crisis was inherited from the previous state government, alleging that Aminuddin failed to fulfil his responsibilities under the state’s constitution.
In a statement, Aminuddin said the public should be told which constitutional provision the previous state administration was alleged to have violated.
“What action did I fail to take? What provision of the Negeri Sembilan Constitution 1959 was breached, and when did the alleged breach occur?” he said.
“If there was a mistake, state what the mistake was. If there was a breach of the law, state the provision. In a matter of this magnitude, the people deserve clear and verifiable facts.”
Aminuddin also said he was prepared to be questioned about the matter, adding that his actions and decisions as menteri besar could be evaluated against the available records and documents.
Due process
He also raised the issue of a proclamation dated April 19, saying it was presented to him for signing on April 20 while he was still menteri besar.
Aminuddin said the document was presented with reference to the process under Article 10 of the state constitution, but he decided not to sign it because of serious questions surrounding the process.
Article 10 of the state constitution governs the specific circumstances and procedures under which the Undang Yang Empat – the four ruling chieftains – may temporarily suspend or permanently remove the Yang Dipertuan Besar from the throne.
Aminuddin said Article 10 did not merely concern the powers relating to the position of the Yang Dipertuan Besar, but also prescribed a process that had to be fulfilled, including matters relating to a full and complete inquiry.
He said there was also a dispute at the time over the position of one of the parties involved as the undang of Sungei Ujong.
“Ismail, as someone with a legal background, is certainly very familiar with the word ‘process’. Was it complete? Or was it flawed from the very beginning?” he said.
“In such circumstances, I took a position based on proper legal advice that a menteri besar should not put his signature on a document with such major implications for the royal institution while questions over its process and validity remained unclear.
“This was my position and, Alhamdulillah, that position remains unchanged today, and I do not consider myself to have been ‘forced’.”
Aminuddin also asked why Ismail signed the document when he had earlier refused to do so.
“If I, as menteri besar, could decide not to sign the document because I had doubts about the process, how could the signature of the menteri besar who came after me appear on the same document?” he said.
“This is the question that needs to be explained directly to the people.”
Aminuddin also pointed to differing interpretations surrounding Article 10 of the state constitution. He said the provision should be treated as a constitutional process with specific requirements and procedures, including whether the requirement for a full and complete inquiry was fulfilled.
Aminuddin said the Attorney-General’s Chambers (AGC) took the position on Sept 17 that the April 19 proclamation was invalid because the mandatory requirements under Article 10 were not complied with.
He said the AGC also maintained that the menteri besar and state executive council did not have unilateral power to declare the office of the Yang Dipertuan Besar vacant. - FMT

No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.