Unnecessary Drama?

There is no such doctrine of automatic dissolution. It must be an overt act of the sovereign signing the proclamation of dissolution. – Tommy Thomas

According to this article, the 7th May sitting of the Perak state assembly was technically unnecessary. Tommy argues that there are effectively only two ways that an assembly can be dissolved:

  1. Upon a request made by the head of the government or a state to the prime minister or sultan;
  2. When Parliament or a legislative assembly reaches the end of a five-year term when general elections must be held.

If this was unnecessary, why would BN still push for it? Could they have been mislead by their team of lawyers (who, according to a source present in the assembly on 7th May, were quite arrogant and had told her if she didn’t like the way things were going, she “should just migrate to another country.” WTF?! Patutlah jadi lawyer diorang…)? Or, was there something to prove by doing this?

In any case, it now appears that should snap elections be held in Perak, BN would have the hardest of chances to regain any semblance of a footing in the Silver state.

Or, is that part of a/the plan?

Although, based on how the House imbroglio has been handled (calling the executive into the legislature’s domain?! WTF?!), it appears to be little coherence to the planning. Hmm.


About this entry