No way, Hisham!


Nicole Tan Lee Koon
you would like to criticism upon Hishamuddin's make the difference upon the 16th of Feb, 2013 which the Registrar Of Societies can examine DAP as well as DAP run the risk of being deregistered usually like UMNO in 1987 :http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/bahasa/article/ros-boleh-mula-siasat-dap-kata-hishamuddin/
In his promptness to finish DAP off, Hishamuddin done the huge blunder by jumping the gun. His belligerent was manifested ever so clearly. The 60 days period which he mentioned can be found in Section fourteen of the Societies Act 1966. Section fourteen stipulates which every registered multitude shall forward to the Registrar inter alia, copies of AGM minutes; attendance; amendments to rules (if any); list of bureau bearers; address of the society; accounts inside of 60 days after the land of the annual ubiquitous meeting. For those who have been familiar, it is essentially the filing of Borang 9 returns. DAP has filed the necessary earnings in accordance to Section fourteen as reliable by DAP NS State Chairman as well as additionally National Organising Secretary , Anthony Loke Siew Fook in response to Hishamuddin's press make the difference upon the same day.
What Hishamuddin meant was probably Section sixteen which stipulates which if the Registrar is of the opinion which the dispute has occurred in between the members as the outcome of which the Registrar is not satisfied of the identity of the persons who have been properly constituted as office-bearers of the society, the Registrar may serve notice upon the multitude requiring the society, inside of one month of the use of such notice, to furnish to him justification of the correct ap! pointmen t of the official office-bearers of the multitude as well as if any such notice is not complied with to the satisfaction of the Registrar inside of the period of one month, the Registrar may take stairs to cancel the registration of the society.
What the ROS should have done was to issue the notice pursuant to Section 16, which the ROS did not do so. you opine which even if the notice was issued, DAP does not run the risk of being de-registered as follows. Firstly, pursuant to Section 16, you can furnish justification of the correct appointment of the official bureau bearers i.e the inner as well as outmost auditors' reports which obviously states which the manual counting as well as formula were correct as well as valid. However, there was the "copy as well as paste" error when the formula were transcribed to the computer. The mistake was then rectified.
Secondly, underneath Sections 18A-18C (provisions germane to domestic parties only), where there is any inconsistency in between Sections 18A-18C as well as any supplies in the Act, Sections 18A-18C shall prevail. Section 18C stipulates which the preference of the domestic celebration upon any make the difference relating to the affairs of the celebration shall be last as well as decisive as well as such preference shall not be challenged, appealed against, reviewed, quashed or called in subject in any justice upon any ground, as well as no justice shall have office to perform or establish any suit, application, subject or move upon any belligerent per the effect of such decision.
you repeat emphatically which the preference of the domestic celebration upon any make the difference shall be last as well as conclusive. What more carrying been irreproachable by the outmost auditor's report.
When UMNO was deregistered in 1987, they longed for to safeguard which history does not repeat itself as well as hence enacted Section 18C. Chedet pre-empted any moves by domestic opponents to de-regi! ster the domestic celebration back in 1987 (but Section 18C usually took effect in 1990). Therefore, Hishamuddin is wrong to contend which DAP situation is the same as the time UMNO was deregistered. Karmic ? Further, the Court in the box of Pendaftar Pertubuhan Malaysia v PV Das (Bagi Pihak People's Progressive Party of Malaysia (PPP)) resolved which underneath the business the election of the plaintiff as President of PPP as well as the capitulation as well as publicity of the defendant's Presidency of the PPP have been the decisions of the domestic celebration inside of the meaning of Section 18C of the Act as well as which the business of electing the president or the capitulation as well as publicity of the president have been 'matters relating to the affairs of the party'. Therefore, decisions upon such make the difference in the perspective of the Court have been last as well as decisive decisions as well as the justice has no office to subject the effect of such decisions.
Section 18C of the Societies Act creates such disputes counts of inner affairs of the domestic parties as well as the non-justiciable domestic subject not fit for judicial determination. The territory precludes the courts from exercising office in counts relating to the inner affairs of domestic parties.
De-register DAP ? No way, Hisham !! you titillate the Home Minister to do the little task before making the press make the difference which threatens to deregister the challenging opposition domestic celebration !

Nicole Tan Lee Koon
Secretary, Seremban branch, DAP NS
Tweet handle : @loyarbaik
Read More @ Source



More Barisan Nasional (BN) | Pakatan Rakyat (PR) | Sociopolitics Plus |
Courtesy of Bonology.com Politically Incorrect Buzz & Buzz

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)