I received an e-mail today. It bears no name of the sender. But the e-mail address of the sender is hafa_law@........com. I do not know who the sender is but I note that "hafa" seems to be the first part of the name "Hafarizam". Hafarizam is of course one of the the lawyers acting for Zambry or any one of the parties who were pro-BN (I must confess that I can't really remember exactly who he was acting for in the "tree injunction" case and so I stand corrected on this).
(Note: Hafarizam has denied that it was him who sent me the e-mail in question and that he was the author of the document attached in that e-mail. Please see my post script for a full explaination.)
The e-mail contained an attachment. The sender said "Please read as per attached. Publish it inside your blog if you dare." I have read and I am going to publish it here. I just don't understand why the dare was thrown. There is no necessity for the dare. Feel free to send any article or post to me any comment. Rest assured I will publish it.
For the record, I don't practise censorship. And my intention of having this blog is to create awareness and promote discourse. As long as the post or comment is not inflammatory or wrongful under the law, I would publish it. No problem.
I have replied to the said e-mail asking who the writer of the attachment is but I have not got a reply. And I can't verify whether the e-mail was sent by Hafarizam. I will publish an addendum as and when I receive a response to my query.
For the time being I am publishing the attachment to the said e-mail verbatim and as I received it without any edition of any kind. I don't even format it, lest I be accused of tampering.
The attachment reads as follows.
"Mr Art Harun,
It would appear that you are not, only an Advocate and Solicitor for 22 years, but a misguided/one track minded and lack of judicial appreciation. Why I say this is simple and in its simplicity is:
(1) The under the 'tree' meeting purporting to be a sitting of the Perak Legislative Assembly is not constitutionally sanctioned but His Majesty the Sultan of Perak. You would recall that the 3rd Sitting of the 1st term of the Perak Legislative Assembly was ‘prorogued’ (diberhentikan) in late November 2008. It was not ‘adjourned’ (ditangguhkan) as the Mr Vice-President o Bar Council akin to Parti Keadilan Rakyat (just that he does not have the balls to enter politics!) Ragunath Kesavan said! To Ragunath, leave/resign from Bar Council, go and contest! (Sorry for the distraction but had to put records straight).
Now, back to what I said earlier, under the Perak Constitution, any meetings of the Assembly needs to get His Majesty the Sultan of Perak's consent (read the Perak Constitution, if I’m not mistaken Article XXXI, but hey find it yourself!). This is commonsensical since His Royal Highness is the Head of the State and under His Majesty's Government, there is the Executive headed by the Menteri Besar and Legislative headed by the Speaker. That is why, in every envelope letter that goes out from either offices, it will have the printed 'Urusan Seri Paduka Sultan'! In England, it is 'Her Majesty's Government's Affairs'. Why is it that in England people can accept/respect such privileges by Her Majesty but here on the contrary? Even Tommy Thomas when he was in chambers that day didn’t have any answer to that! Why, because he knows the Speaker has acted ‘ultra vires’;
(2) The summoning of the 'tree' meeting is nothing but a fait accompli (in English, a done deal) with respect to ousting the 3 brave ADUNS who declared independent (although they support BN, so what, in England LDP led by a once gay leader switched support to either Conservative or Labour1) from attending lawfully convened (I mean here with His Majesty's consent/gazetted in the State Gazette) Perak State Legislative Assembly. Why this is is simple and clear is;
(a) That on 1/2/2009 the Speaker, acting under his own whims and fancies with total disregard to law (or better still in the words of YB Lim Kit Siang when he once said that BN 'rule by law' rather than 'rule of law' but paradoxically, the DAP Speaker is now 'ruling BY law' by usurping (for want of better word) the powers and jurisdiction of the Election Commission to establish whether the 3 seats were vacant casually by virtue of 3 resignations. Please read (and before you start to further confuse others) Article XXXVI(V) of the Perak Constitution which the operative words here is "...it is established by the Election Commission..." and read together with Section 12(3) of the Elections Act, 1958 (also operative word is similar to the earlier Art XXXVI(V); (b) Compounded further, or better if I say clouding the issues by the filing of OS for declaration by Messrs Chan & Associates (it only 3 pages mind you! and without 'fiat') and with no AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT AND CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY and later on, two days ago (5/3/2009), filed a notice of discontinuance (suprisingly but expectedly). This act of filing and then discontinuing is an act of cowardice! Mr Chan KK you really have a lot to explain the abuses you have done to the Honorable Court!! Surely, this is to exclude the 3 ADUNS (Behrang/Changkat Jering/Jelapang) from attending a lawfully constituted meeting of the Assembly! Looking at this strategy, one would not fail to notice that it is a fait accompli to exclude the 3 ADUNS!! If the Speaker is so immune and brave, face it like a man (like how Hafarizam faced Tommy Thomas & Ors and got them 'ousted' from acting on behalf of the Speaker on 3/3/09! You would be joking to insist that to have any Advocate & Solicitor to simply act for the Speaker when, in this case, Tommy Thomas was one of Anwar Ibrahim's lawyer! Will he (or any lawyers like Philip Koh, Chan KK & Augustine) act and argue independently as the Defender of the Perak Constitution as sworn under the Perak Constitution (like the State Legal Adviser of Perak)? That is the joke of the century! To play to your gallery, why then Haji Sulaiman objected streneously to YB State LA acting for YAB Menteri Besar Dato' Dr Zambry in the KL High Court Suit No 25-25-2009 (shameful/sour grapes Nizar vs YAB Dato’ Dr Zambry)!! Come on Art Harun, you can’t have 2 rules of the game for a football match. Either you play football or handball!
(3) Like Hafarizam said, 'Mesyuarat bawah Pokok hanyalah tinggal mesyuarat bawah pokok' is also another fait accompli doen by the DAP Speaker with respect to ousting/check-mating/preventing/excluding YAB MB Dato Dr Zambry & his 6 EXCOs! Why:
(1) On 18/2/2009, the Speaker heard/presided & decided on his own self and with complete folly (of course being advised by his Esteemed Counsel, Chan KK (or maybe T Thomas) suspended MB Dato Dr Zambry and his 6 EXCOs for them swearing in as MB & EXCOs when His Majesty has decreed so (isnt this a 'back' door way...reminds me of Anwar Ibrahim here!). The propagator to this ‘suspension’ which, I contend, unconstitutional/unlawful/’ultra vires’ is non other than from YB Wong Kah Woh (ADUN Canning but I think he should be ‘canned’ instead for such disgraceful act & conduct unbecoming of an ADUN) who happens to be a lawyer but unfortunately without reading carefully, maybe because he didnt pass his July Paper for the CLP Exams (or whatever you called it), the Standing Orders (especially Order 72(2) which specifically says "...Jika Dewan tidak bersidang..., hendaklah melaporkan kepada Dewan"; Bear this swift/fast action nothing like an act of desperado Mr Art Harun: Complaint was filed on 13/2/2009 (am) and Rights and Privileges Committee immediately convened and sat in the evening of 12/2/2009 and on 13/2/2009 the ‘lunatic’ Speaker under dictates of Chan KK & Philip Koh issued Summons to appear before the Right and Privileges Committee on 18/2/2009 and on the same day (the Speaker, on his own self without referring to Dewan Negeri since the Dewan is not in sitting [under Art 72(2) of the Standing Orders) suspended MB Dato Dr Zambry for 18 months and EXCOs 12 months;
(2) Not only he is abusive but also evasive, the Speaker disregarded the complaint to Rights and Privileges Committee which he chairs by one BN YB Zahir (EXCO) against the Speaker for his abuse of power who until now when for YB Wong Kah Woh he can do it almost the same day has not called for Committee meeting! Is not this double-standard!
(3) By the way, on 5/3/2009, Public Accounts Committee of Perak (Chaired by YB Wong Kah Woh, familiar rite? Yes! He is the complainant which got the MB & his 6 EXCOs suspended through his swift/fast action accelerated by the Speaker) called MB Dato' Dr Zambry but on the wise advise of Hafarizam (I think) didn’t attend because its another waste of time (also because Erskine May Parliamentary Practices say at page 784 “you cant summons PAC meeting when the House is not in session although you can travel”).
So, Mr Art Harun, whats the cumulative effect of this!! The 'tree' meeting has technically though not intelligently ousted the 3 ADUNS and also the MB and his 6 EXCOs from being able to attend any Assembly unless (which is being done by Hafarizam’s lawyer):
(1) an injunction is obtained to stop the Speaker from acting as a lunatic further (remember the English song, 'the lunatics have overtaken the asylum');
(2) a declaration is sought to nullify the Speaker's act in declaring the 3 DUN seats are vacant (suit no 24-237-2009, please do a file search and you'll agree to correct your statement earlier that Hafarizam & Co should have filed it); and
(3) anor declaration to nullify yet another lunatic act of suspending MB Zambry & 6 EXCOs (suit no. 24-247-2009)! Why is this not highlighted by you all here? Oh yes, i forgot, this is because Chan KK (who is on panel of BSN...thats UMNO related Company. maybe the firm where he is now with should be removed from the panelship, after all its a fully Chinese firm (not helping the Malays) and Mr Philip Koh of Mah-Kamariyah... (is this another 'Ali Baba' firm using Malay name to get work from GLCs when able/strong Malay firms find it so hard to get work from Public Bank (any other Chinese banks/companies that you can surely imagine) but when Maybank sets conditions of 50% Bumi partners to qualify for panelship the whole nation goes berserk! Dont you all, Malays, out there notice what/how you have been played out?? Go to Mid-Valley, One Utama, and Pavilion etc; find me 5 Malay shops that are still in operation (the last of the 'Malay' Mohican being Kelantan Delights but being unfairly treated by KLCC). What meritocracy you are talking about! Its neo-ultra Chinese dominance, don’t you think so! Got carried away but I have to state my mind clearly coz you blogs seem to get support from my own race! Sad that you are becoming another “Patek Mohon Derhaka Tuanku”!
Please read the cases of Datu Amir Kahar (1995); distinguish the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan (1988) and read the ‘effects’ of an undated resignation letters in Datuk One Kee Hui’s case (just go to cljlaw and search for it or you need to be told since your 22 years of practice is just ‘Ali Baba’ partnership!). I can’t give you more because it is useless to talk to a lawyer who ‘confused’ others.
Finally, I dare that you post this write up on your blogs so that readers can have a balanced view!! I’ll visit you blog when I have the time to see how far your bravery is!" - end quote.
My reply is:
I am not in an Ali Baba partnership. I don't know why the writer states so. How does he know anyway? Probably he knows because he is used to such partnership.
Secondly, the case of Amir Kahar is not applicable. You want proof of that? Well, just read the High Court judgement in the Nizar v Zambri case. I have held that opinion all along. Amir Kahar is based on a different set of fact.
Thirdly, as for your urging Ragunath to enter politics, could you write to him personally. But I don't understand your call as such. You mean to say only politicians can talk about politics? Ordinary citizen can't, huh? I have received that kind of remark also before. The thing is, is it wrong for an ordinary non-politician citizen to comment about politics? Must he or she enter politics and run in an election first before he or she is qualified to do so? So before I could have sex, I must be a porn star first, huh? Or before I could write, I must be an author or writer first? How?
Kind regards. Keep it coming. It is good for the public to read both side of the views.
Thank you, whoever you are.
I contacted Hafarizam's office and requested to speak with him. He was not in and I left a message as well as my mobile number. He later contacted me and we had a cordial conversation. I told him of the e-mail and the document attached to it. He said he will read my blog. He text me later to advise the followings. The e-mail address is in fact his office general e-mail address which is used by all the staffs. He denied sending the e-mail to me. The document attached to the e-mail, which I reproduced here is not authored by him. He suspected the document was authored by one of "the attachments students that assisted" him in the tree injunction matter. He however subscribed to the view that that tree assembly was illegal or invalid. However he does not agree with the personal attacks in the document. He will clarify this in his blog when he has the time. His thoughts on the tree injunction matter, the 3 ADUN and their suspension can be found on his blogs at www.puu-umno.blogspot.com .