by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Thursday, 28th January 1993:
Will Keng Yaik resign as Cabinet Minister and Gerakan pull out of Barisan Nasional if UMNO leaders return to the discussion table with the Rulers to find an amicable settlement to the constitutional crisis?
In his speech in Sungei Siput on Tuesday night, the Gerakan President, Datuk Dr. Lim Keng Yaik, picked on DAP as the target for his attack for the abstention of the DAP MPs in Parliament on the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill.
It is most unfortunate that Keng Yaik and other Gerakan leaders want to ‘politicise’ the constitutional crisis facing the country, even to the extent of telling half-truths and lies as to allege that the DAP wants the Rulers to have the unfettered right to beat up or kill ordinary people in the country.
If the DAP wants the Rulers to have the unfettered right to beat up or kill ordinary people, the DAP MPs would not have voted in full support of the motion in Parliament introduced by the Deputy Prime Minister, Ghafar Baba, on December 10, 1992 to censure the Sultan of Johore for his assault on Douglas Gomez, and in 1984, DAP Deputy Chairman and MP for Jelutong, Sdr. Karpal Singh would not have raised the issue of royal criminal wrongdoing resulting in his suspension from Parliament.
It is clear that there are certain political leaders in the Barisan Nasional who think they have the immunity and license to tell lies and spread falsehoods.
If Malaysia is to become a fully democratic country, it is not only the Rulers’ immunity to commit criminal or civil wrongdoings which must be removed, but the immunity of political leaders in government to tell lies and spread falsehoods must also be wiped out.
It would appear that Keng Yaik is totally opposed to the DAP’s stand and arguments on the constitutional crisis, in particular the DAP’s call to the Government and the Rulers to return to the discussion table to seek an amicable settlement which brings the Rulers fully within the jurisdiction of the law as well as obtaining the consent of the Conference of the Rulers.
As Keng Yaik seems so opposed to the DAP’s call that the Rulers and the Government return to the discussion table, will Keng Yaik resign as Cabinet Minister and Gerakan pull out of Barisan Nasional if UMNO leaders ever return to the discussion table with the Rulers to find an amicable settlement to the constitutional crisis?
DAP is calling on the Rulers and the Government to return to the discussion table because under the present Constitution, there is no way whereby the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill could become law without the consent of the Conference of Rulers.
In calling on the Rulers and the Government to return to the discussion table, the DAP is not asking the Government to sacrifice the principle that no Ruler is above the law to commit criminal or civil wrongdoing, but to resolve the constitutional crisis within the framework of the constitution.
DAP MPs would have voted in support of the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill on January 19 if the Rulers had given their consent or if the Constitution had not stipulated the necessity to obtain the consent of the Conference of Rulers
Keng Yaik has his own reasons to put on his pose as the ‘foolish doctor’ who does not understand the reasons for the DAP’s abstention vote in Parliament during the voting of the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill.
The DAP had made it very clear that we supported the principles and proposals in the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill because it agreed with the three principles which had been adopted by the DAP, namely:
* no Ruler is above the law and is at liberty to commit criminal or civil wrongdoings;
* that every individual aggrieved by any royal wrongdoing should be able to seek redress and secure
justice; and
* that the government is duty-bound to uphold the rule of law and give protection to life and property
of every individual in the country.
The DAP MPs would have voted in support of the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill in the Dewan Rakyat on January 19 if the Rulers had given their consent or if the Malaysian Constitution had not stipulated the necessity of obtaining the consent of the Rulers in any amendments affecting the privileges, positions, honours and dignities of the Rulers.
DAP would stand firmly on the people’s side if there is an unavoidable confrontation between the people and the Rulers on the issue of removal of Rulers’ immunity
DAP MPs could not take lightly any disregard of the Malaysian Constitution, especially at a time when there are calls for the imposition of hukum hudud and the introduction of Islamic laws despite the 35-year secular basis and guarantee of the Federal Constitution.
However, there can be no doubt as to the DAP’s stand on the removal of the Rulers’ immunity if the Rulers had been totally opposed to any constitutional amendment and there was an unavoidable confrontation between the people and the Rulers over the issue – as the DAP would stand firmly on the people’s side.
Such an extreme situation had not been reached, even by today, as the Rulers had made this important acknowledgement in their statement issued on 18th January 1993:
“No Ruler has the right to hurt or cause harm to another person. The Conference of Rulers agrees to the formation of an effective mechanism to hear the rakyat’s grievances against them. It is in total agreement in the view that there cannot be two systems of justice in the country.”
Furthermore, in their statement, the Conference of Rulers called for “further deliberation and consultation with the Government” on the 1993 Constitutional Amendment Bill.
As the Conference of Rulers had accepted the principle that Rulers are not above the law to commit criminal or civil wrongdoings, and had called for “further deliberation and consultation”, the door for the Rulers and the Government to return to the discussion table should not be slammed shut.
I only hope that Keng Yaik would add his voice to the DAP call that the Government and the Rulers return to the discussion table, instead of trying to play party politics between the Gerakan and the DAP out of the constitutional crisis.