IPOH, Aug 3 – Perak Pakatan Rakyat lawmakers have accused Datuk R. Ganesan of being a Barisan Nasional “puppet”, claiming he had been instructed to eject former mentri besar Datuk Seri Mohammad Nizar Jamaluddin from the House today.
The PR leaders, who staged a walkout from the assembly hall at about 1.30pm this afternoon after their leader Nizar was suspended for being difficult, claimed that the suspension order had not been Ganesan’s idea.
Former speaker V. Sivakumar claimed that prior to Ganesan’s decision to eject Nizar (picture) from the House, a man had walked up to the Speaker’s dais to pass him a note.
“It is clear that he (Ganesan) is sitting there but he does not know what he is doing. He is a puppet,” he told a press conference after the walkout.
He claimed that the piece of paper had contained instructions from “another party”, telling Ganesan to remove Nizar, who was in the eye of the assembly storm this afternoon.
A hoarse-sounding Nizar concurred, and accused Ganesan of flip-flopping on his own suspension order, pointing out that the latter had at first said that he was suspending him as an assemblyman.
“How can a speaker have the right to suspend a person’s position as an assemblyman? At the very least, he can only make me face the assembly’s rights and privileges committee or he can ask me to leave the House.
“When he said he was suspending my position, it means that we are supposed to call for a by-election in Pasir Panjang,” he said, laughing.
During the chaotic proceedings today, Ganesan had used his powers as the Speaker under Standing Orders 44(2) for causing “haru biru” in the House under Standing Orders 36(6) to demand for Nizar’s removal.’
“I order him to leave the House. I am suspending him from his jawatan (position) as a member of the House,” he said.
At the time, a stubborn Nizar was standing and attempting to proceed with his debate on the supplementary supply bill althought his alloted 15-minute slot had ended more than 20 minutes before that.
Nizar however refused to budge and he, along with several other PR lawmakers, chided Ganesan for claiming he had the power to suspend an assemblyman from his post.
Ganesan later clarified after state executive councillor Datuk Ramly Zahari raised an emergency motion under Standing Orders 44(3) and said that Nizar had only been suspended for the day, until the conclusion of the state assembly.
“I asked him to retract his words and only then he said that I should leave the hall, not that I was being suspended as an assemblyman,” Nizar claimed.
He added that during the hullabaloo, he had merely been attempting to “plead and appeal” to the House to allow him to complete his speech.
“Before we started this, we already said that we wanted at least a four-day sitting, not a one-day sitting. We wanted ample time for all representatives to debate but this did not happen.
“How can we debate a RM80 million bill in just one day? You all know, in the past during PR’s time, our sittings lasted for days and we gave respect to our opposition leader (former mentri besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Tajol Rosli Ghazali) to debate for at least two hours,” he said.
During today’s sitting, Ganesan told the House that the first speakers from both the BN and PR would each be given 15 minutes to debate while the subsequent speakers would only be given 10 minutes each.
They were debating the RM80 million supplementary supply bill tabled by the BN government.
“I was appealing... pleading for the right to speak so that I could go through all of what I had prepared. I prepared a speech that should go on for one hour. But I was disallowed. How can a person debate anything in 15 minutes, or ten minutes? What can we say? By the time we speak our introduction, our time is up.
“The assemblyman from Slim, he could speak because his microphone was turned on. Mine was turned off. I had to shout at the top of my lungs,” said Nizar.
He shrugged off the fact that all PR representatives, especially himself, had repeatedly provoked Ganesan’s ire when they refused to call him “Yang Dipertua (Speaker)” and only referred to him as “Pengerusi Majlis (chairman)” and “Datuk Ganesan”.
“If you are the speaker, it does not matter what we call you, you will still be the speaker, right?” he said, flippantly.
During the sitting, Nizar received flak numerous times when he calmly called Ganesan by his name and “chairman”. Despite receiving numerous warnings, Nizar stuck to his resolve and refused to relent.
Former state executive councillor Nga Kor Ming said that all PR representatives had walked out of the House as a show of support for Nizar and to indicate their unhappiness over having been denied the right to debate for longer durations.
The PR leaders, who staged a walkout from the assembly hall at about 1.30pm this afternoon after their leader Nizar was suspended for being difficult, claimed that the suspension order had not been Ganesan’s idea.Former speaker V. Sivakumar claimed that prior to Ganesan’s decision to eject Nizar (picture) from the House, a man had walked up to the Speaker’s dais to pass him a note.
“It is clear that he (Ganesan) is sitting there but he does not know what he is doing. He is a puppet,” he told a press conference after the walkout.
He claimed that the piece of paper had contained instructions from “another party”, telling Ganesan to remove Nizar, who was in the eye of the assembly storm this afternoon.
A hoarse-sounding Nizar concurred, and accused Ganesan of flip-flopping on his own suspension order, pointing out that the latter had at first said that he was suspending him as an assemblyman.
“How can a speaker have the right to suspend a person’s position as an assemblyman? At the very least, he can only make me face the assembly’s rights and privileges committee or he can ask me to leave the House.
“When he said he was suspending my position, it means that we are supposed to call for a by-election in Pasir Panjang,” he said, laughing.
During the chaotic proceedings today, Ganesan had used his powers as the Speaker under Standing Orders 44(2) for causing “haru biru” in the House under Standing Orders 36(6) to demand for Nizar’s removal.’
“I order him to leave the House. I am suspending him from his jawatan (position) as a member of the House,” he said.
At the time, a stubborn Nizar was standing and attempting to proceed with his debate on the supplementary supply bill althought his alloted 15-minute slot had ended more than 20 minutes before that.
Nizar however refused to budge and he, along with several other PR lawmakers, chided Ganesan for claiming he had the power to suspend an assemblyman from his post.
Ganesan later clarified after state executive councillor Datuk Ramly Zahari raised an emergency motion under Standing Orders 44(3) and said that Nizar had only been suspended for the day, until the conclusion of the state assembly.
“I asked him to retract his words and only then he said that I should leave the hall, not that I was being suspended as an assemblyman,” Nizar claimed.
He added that during the hullabaloo, he had merely been attempting to “plead and appeal” to the House to allow him to complete his speech.
“Before we started this, we already said that we wanted at least a four-day sitting, not a one-day sitting. We wanted ample time for all representatives to debate but this did not happen.
“How can we debate a RM80 million bill in just one day? You all know, in the past during PR’s time, our sittings lasted for days and we gave respect to our opposition leader (former mentri besar Datuk Seri Mohamad Tajol Rosli Ghazali) to debate for at least two hours,” he said.
During today’s sitting, Ganesan told the House that the first speakers from both the BN and PR would each be given 15 minutes to debate while the subsequent speakers would only be given 10 minutes each.
They were debating the RM80 million supplementary supply bill tabled by the BN government.
“I was appealing... pleading for the right to speak so that I could go through all of what I had prepared. I prepared a speech that should go on for one hour. But I was disallowed. How can a person debate anything in 15 minutes, or ten minutes? What can we say? By the time we speak our introduction, our time is up.
“The assemblyman from Slim, he could speak because his microphone was turned on. Mine was turned off. I had to shout at the top of my lungs,” said Nizar.
He shrugged off the fact that all PR representatives, especially himself, had repeatedly provoked Ganesan’s ire when they refused to call him “Yang Dipertua (Speaker)” and only referred to him as “Pengerusi Majlis (chairman)” and “Datuk Ganesan”.
“If you are the speaker, it does not matter what we call you, you will still be the speaker, right?” he said, flippantly.
During the sitting, Nizar received flak numerous times when he calmly called Ganesan by his name and “chairman”. Despite receiving numerous warnings, Nizar stuck to his resolve and refused to relent.
Former state executive councillor Nga Kor Ming said that all PR representatives had walked out of the House as a show of support for Nizar and to indicate their unhappiness over having been denied the right to debate for longer durations.
He also denied that he had been instructed by someone to remove Nizar from the assembly hall, refuting allegations made earlier today by his predecessor V. Sivakumar.


Premis maksiat seumpama ini sewajarnya dijauhi oleh umat Islam bukan hanya di bulan Ramadhan malah sepanjang tahun. PAS Selangor memang peka dan sentiasa memantau dan memberi perhatian agar agensi penguatkuasaan negeri terutama dari Jabatan Agama Islam Selangor (JAIS) dan pihak PBT meningkatkan aktiviti penguatkuasaan dari masa ke semasa bagi mencegah umat Islam mengunjungi premis sedemikian.
Yong Vui Kong ditangkap kerana mengedar dadah pada usia 18 tahun. Saya tidak berani untuk berkata Yong tidak berdosa, tetapi apa yang saya pasti, Yong seorang yang jahil. Pada ketika itu, Yong membenci nasib yang menimpa dirinya. Soalan yang berlegar dalam hatinya berbunyi, mengapa dirinya tidak memiliki satu keluarga yang bahagia, seperti anak-anak yang lain?
Menurut Peguam Yong Vui Kong, Ravi (gambar kanan), hakim yang membicarakan kes ini pada peringkat awal, Choo Han Teck turut menganggap Yong terlalu naif, dan terlalu muda - sehingga tidak sampai hati untuk menjatuhkan hukuman mati. Choo mencadangkan pendakwaraya untuk meminda tuduhan tersebut, tetapi tidak diterima.
Abangnya melawatnya setiap minggu, dan Yong menggalakkan agar abangnya memilih jalan sendiri. Adiknya pula menanggung kepahitan untuk membawa balik habuk mayatnya (jikalau Yong dihukum mati). Dari kesangsian, keresahan, ketakutan untuk berdepan dengan kamera (media), sehinggalah keberaniannya untuk berdepan dengan segala-galanya pada hari ini, kekuatan adik Yong berasal daripada Vui Kong.
Kami bukannya pertubuhan untuk membantah hukuman mati, tetapi kami terpanggil untuk melakukan sesuatu untuk Yong Vui Kong. Kami menyedari bahawa hukuman mati sarat dengan pertikaian, dan kami menghormati pendirian masing-masing. Namun, kempen "Peluang Kedua Untuk Yang Insaf" ini hanya bertujuan untuk mengutip tandatangan, agar peluang kedua diberikan kepada Yong, setelah meneliti latar belakangnya dan tekadnya untuk menebus kesalahannya.










































