ReformIS
[ Berita (News) | Cari (Search) | Menu Utama (Main Menu) | Hantar Berita (Submit News) ]
From: Sangwon Suh and Santha Oorjitham / Kuala Lumpur
Date: 04 May 1999
Time: 15:35:42
MALAYSIA HAS A NEW king. But don't look for much excitement among the masses. In Malaysia, the kingship is hardly the stuff of glamour that it is elsewhere; the position is largely ceremonial and is rotated among the country's nine royal rulers, each serving five years. On April 26, Tuanku Ja'afar Tuanku Abdul Rahman, ruler of Negri Sembilan state, completed his term as Malaysia's 10th king and handed over his responsibilities to Sultan Salahuddin Abdul Aziz Shah of Selangor. The ceremony was carried out with a fair bit of pomp in Kuala Lumpur, but most residents were less concerned about the inauguration than about the inconvenience caused by blocked thoroughfares. A sense of anticipation was not entirely lacking, however. The accession may turn out to have a connection - like many events of late - to the political event: the Anwar Ibrahim saga. Few observers are oblivious to the fact that the former deputy prime minister's fate may well lie in the hands of the new king. Fired by his boss, Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, and prosecuted for corruption, Anwar was recently found guilty and sentenced to six years. He is appealing both the verdict and the sentence, but should he fail in the Court of Appeal and the Federal Court, there is only one recourse left: a royal pardon.
Legal experts disagree on the role the king plays in granting or rejecting pleas for a pardon. According to the Constitution, the king must consider the advice of the Pardons Board, which is composed of the attorney-general, the minister responsible for the federal territory and up to three other members appointed by the king. But how much influence does the board have over the king's final decision?
Former attorney-general Abu Talib Othman says the king is bound by the board's recommendations: "The king acts on the advice of the Pardons Board. It is not a matter which falls within his sole discretion." Lawyer Dominic Puthucheary disagrees. "The king has absolute discretion," he says. "The Pardons Board can only offer views." Peter Mooney, a senior member of the Malaysian Bar, agrees with Puthucheary - but only up to a point. "The decision is exclusively his," he says, but reckons the king "will not see it as his function to take a different view from that advised. He's the head of state, not a political leader."
Interestingly, both Tuanku Ja'afar, 76, and Sultan Salahuddin, 73, went to the same school as Anwar - the elite Malay College Kuala Kangsar. Afterward, Tuanku Ja'afar earned a bachelor's degree in law at Nottingham University and served in various diplomatic posts before becoming ruler of Negri Sembilan in 1968. "He's very tactful," says former lord president (old title for chief justice) Tun Mohamed Suffian Hashim.
Sultan Salahuddin's career was more rooted at home. After short stints at London University and the Federation Military College, he worked in the Selangor state service before becoming sultan in 1960. Mooney describes him as "conscientious, anxious to behave in a manner appropriate to his station, warm and friendly."
The fact that Anwar and Sultan Salahuddin are fellow alumni is not likely to improve any chances of a pardon. But there is another factor that might come into play: that relations between Malaysia's royal leaders and Mahathir have often been strained. Mahathir has twice moved to reduce the influence of the sultans. In August 1983, Parliament passed a number of constitutional amendments, one of which would allow federal bills to become law 15 days after passage - with or without the king's assent.
Not surprisingly, the sultans balked. Malaysia descended into a constitutional crisis as pro-royalist and pro-government rallies were held across the country. In the end, a compromise was reached when the period for royal assent was extended from 15 to 30 days, in addition to other changes made.
The sultans and the administration collided once again in late 1992. Until then, the royals had enjoyed legal immunity for any of their actions. But when a citizen complained that the sultan of Johor had hit him, Mahathir moved to remove the immunity where the actions were made in a personal (as opposed to official) capacity. An agreement was eventually reached whereby the rulers would be tried in a five-member special court.
All this is not to say Anwar is assured a pardon. Neither Tuanku Ja'afar nor Sultan Salahuddin ever spoke out publicly against the constitutional amendments. At his farewell ceremony, the former monarch even seemed to give his support to the administration, praising Mahathir's "bold and vocal stand in championing justice."
Recent history does not favor Anwar either. Opposition MP Lim Guan Eng, jailed for sedition and publishing false news, recently had his plea for a pardon rejected by Tuanku Ja'afar. For Anwar supporters, a royal pardon is obviously something to aim for if the appeals fail, but a Plan B would probably be useful.