'Agong blocking PCA might trigger constitutional crisis'

The agong refusing to ascend the controversial Prevention of Crime (Amendment and Extension) Bill 2013 may trigger a constitutional crisis, warned constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari.

He was commenting on DAP national chairman Karpal Singh's move tos submit a petition to the agong today urging the latter to intervene in the passage of the bill, which was bulldozed through Dewan Rakyat two weeks ago and also swiftly passed at the Dewan Negara.

"Karpal is right to bring up the idea of asking the agong to intervene in the passage of PCA but such an option may trigger a constitutional crisis," Abdul Aziz toldMalaysiakini in an email yesterday.

"And it will put Umno-BN in a difficult position as it would pit against the rulers. In the meantime the Federal Court that has the duty to declare the law will have to make a choice to side with the government or with the constitution, which upholds the rulers' position," he added.

Abdul Aziz contended that the constitutional provision under article 66(4A) of the Federal Constitution, which empowers Parliament to bypass the agong and was inserted in 1994, is not valid and that the agong still has the power to interfere.

"My view is that article 66(4A) is not valid - and that the old provision that allows the agong some space to interfere still stands - but this has to be done through an application in court," he said.

However, in order for this to happen, Abdul Aziz said, BN and the rulers, often seen as a compliment to each other, have to "part company".

"As of now both seem to be on the same side; (the rulers) helping Umno-BN to maintain grip on power, but such a challenge will put the parties - Umno-BN, the rulers and the judges - in a difficult position," he said. 

Abdul Aziz also expressed doubt whether the rulers will agree to oppose the ascension of the bill given the circumstances.

"Will the rulers oppose it this time around? With members of their families being involved in business they may have no choice - just like in 1993 (when they) agreed to sign part of their immunity away," he said.