MALAYSIA IS NOT ONE COUNTRY

Go Addy: "malaysia" is not one country. It is a federation of 3 Nations (Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak) - every Nation is independent of each other as seperate legal entity. That is the Federation of 'malaysia" (in accordance with the Malaysia Agreement 1963 - if still valid)

Instead of complying with the Federation arrangement, Malaya is changing the rules in the middle of the game to turn "malaysia' into a " Unitary State " by taking away of the autonomous rights of Sabah Sarawak and make them states as parts of Malaya.

This has created irreparable damage and irreversible complications. "malaysia" is now at a lost - cannot go forward and cannot go backward : STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE!!!

"malaysia" cannot exist based on the Federation of Malaya Agreement 1957. ( because this agreement does not include Sabah and Sarawak) This Agreement 1957 should have been abolished on 16 September 1963 and replaced with the Malaysia Agreement 1963. This replacement cannot be done because to do so will dissolve the Malayan Union of 11 states and everyone will become independent states ( Kelantan, Trengganu, Johore, Penang and Malacca are ready to opt out at anytime now). In fact in 1963 - 4 days before the proclamation of "malaysia", Kelantan made a Court Application to challenge that the they are not consulted when the Malaysia Agreement was signed in 1963 and are therefore not bound by it.

So the danger of adopting the Malaysia Agreement 1963 as rhe basis to legitimise the formation of "malaysia" cannot be done. 

This explains the reason why Sabah Sarawak legally and constitutionally are by default still remain outside the constitution's definition (Article 160).

NOW - "MALAYSIA" CANNOT GO FORWARD AND CANNOT GO BACKWARDS.

--- STUCK IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE ---

-----NEITHER HERE NEITHER THERE-----

Lina Soo: so precise, thank you Addy. may i add if Malaysia is a new country, then Malaya will have to cease as a member state of United Nations, and Malaysia to re-apply as a new member of UN. 

so quit saying msia is a new nation and all are equal partners. dont believe the spin and propaganda of britain and malaya promoters of malaysia scam. we have been taken for a ride for 52 years, so wake up now

Borneo Wiki: "Malaya" renamed "Malaysia" as stated in MA63. Go Addy --- But, wait...... MA63 was abrogated when S'pore left & the original "Malaysia" agreed to by 4 countries ceased to exist...

So that means SS are not legally part of Malaysia and there is nothing to negotiate except de-colonization!

***In order to get better understanding about this matter, please read these articles, "Defining Malaysia: Is Malaya Masquerading as Malaysia?" and "Is Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) a Valid International Agreement?" Once you finish your reading, you will know the truth. Don't forget to share these articles to your friends.***

Read More

Toppling government through non-violence is constitutional, say lawyers

A Federal Court ruling has allowed for the removal of the chief executive of a state without having to take a vote of no confidence in the legislature, constitutional lawyers said.

They said instead, statutory declarations (SD) from majority elected representatives to remove the government was constitutional as declared by the highest court of the land in 2010.

Lawyer Edmund Bon said a five-man Federal Court bench led by current Chief Justice Tun Arifin Zakaria had approved this procedure in the Perak case of Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin versus Datuk Seri Zambry Abdul Kadir.

Barisan Nasional (BN) had in 2009 submitted 31 SDs from 28 BN assemblymen and 3 opposition representatives who were BN-friendly to convince the ruler of Perak that Nizar, who was then the mentri besar, had lost the majority support of the assemblymen.

  

"The chief political executive (prime minister, mentris besar and chief ministers) can be removed if the appointing authority finds the incumbent no longer enjoys the confidence of the majority," he told The Malaysian Insider.

Bon, who was in the legal team that appeared for Nizar, however, said that most constitutional lawyers and academics was still of the opinion that the better option was to take a vote of no-confidence in the legislature.

He said this in response to Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi's revelation earlier today that an Umno leader was behind a plot to topple the government with the support of opposition lawmakers.

Zahid, who is also home minister, said he had learned that they were preparing statutory declarations (SDs) ‎to remove the government of Datuk Seri Najib Razak. – August 15, 2015.

Source: The Malaysia Insider

Read More