Specific provisions about Islam as well as a miss of a word "secular" in a federal constitution notwithstanding, Malaysia has been officially spoken as a physical state, argued a maestro lawmaker.
"A five-man bench of a Supreme Court (equivalent of a benefaction Federal Court that transposed a Privy Council) presided by a then conduct of a law Tun Salleh Abbas in 1988 in Che Omar garbage bin Che Soh vs Public Prosecutor, obviously settled a law in a nation was secular.
"That being a in front of spoken by (the) tall authority, it must follow fundamentally that a nation was a physical state as well as not an Islamic state, as a nation carrying physical laws could not be an Islamic state," argued DAP national chairperson Karpal Singh.
He believe, as such, that Malaysia has been "judicially pronounced to be a physical (country)".
Karpal (above) was responding to Minister in a Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, parliamentary reply Monday,declaringthat based upon authorised provisions in a country, Malaysia has never been spoken nor endorsed as a physical nation.
Mohd Nazri combined that this was opposite from physical countries like a United States, India as well as Turkey where this is obviously settled in their constitutions.
"A five-man bench of a Supreme Court (equivalent of a benefaction Federal Court that transposed a Privy Council) presided by a then conduct of a law Tun Salleh Abbas in 1988 in Che Omar garbage bin Che Soh vs Public Prosecutor, obviously settled a law in a nation was secular."That being a in front of spoken by (the) tall authority, it must follow fundamentally that a nation was a physical state as well as not an Islamic state, as a nation carrying physical laws could not be an Islamic state," argued DAP national chairperson Karpal Singh.
He believe, as such, that Malaysia has been "judicially pronounced to be a physical (country)".
Karpal (above) was responding to Minister in a Prime Minister's Department Mohd Nazri Abdul Aziz, parliamentary reply Monday,declaringthat based upon authorised provisions in a country, Malaysia has never been spoken nor endorsed as a physical nation.
Mohd Nazri combined that this was opposite from physical countries like a United States, India as well as Turkey where this is obviously settled in their constitutions.
However, Karpal pointed out that conjunction has Malaysia been spoken to be an Islamic state, as reflected in a constitutions of Islamic countries like Pakistan, Bangladesh as well as Iran.
'Invoke Article 130'
![]()
He also rubbished domestic stipulation by Dr Mahathir Mohamed (left) in Sept, 2001 during a Gerakan ubiquitous assembly that Malaysia was an Islamic state.
"(It) does not have a stamp of legitimacy. Both Tunku Abdul Rahman as well as Tun Hussien Onn are upon jot down to have settled that Malaysia was not an Islamic state".
The maestro lawyer hold that a attestation by Mohd Nazri in Parliament that Malaysia is not a physical state, therefore, conflicts with a judicial preference in a case of Che Omar garbage bin Che Soh.
As such, he proposed that a Yang Di-Pertuan Agong invoke his power under Article 130 of a constitution to impute to a full bench of a Federal Court for its perspective as to whether Malaysia is a physical state or an Islamic state.
Article 130 permits "the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to impute to a Federal Court for its perspective upon any question as to a effect of any provision of this constitution that has arisen or appears to him expected to arise, as well as a Federal Court shall pronounce in open court its perspective upon any question so referred to it".
Read More @ Source "(It) does not have a stamp of legitimacy. Both Tunku Abdul Rahman as well as Tun Hussien Onn are upon jot down to have settled that Malaysia was not an Islamic state".
The maestro lawyer hold that a attestation by Mohd Nazri in Parliament that Malaysia is not a physical state, therefore, conflicts with a judicial preference in a case of Che Omar garbage bin Che Soh.
As such, he proposed that a Yang Di-Pertuan Agong invoke his power under Article 130 of a constitution to impute to a full bench of a Federal Court for its perspective as to whether Malaysia is a physical state or an Islamic state.
Article 130 permits "the Yang Di-Pertuan Agong to impute to a Federal Court for its perspective upon any question as to a effect of any provision of this constitution that has arisen or appears to him expected to arise, as well as a Federal Court shall pronounce in open court its perspective upon any question so referred to it".
More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz
No comments:
Post a Comment