THE opening ceremony of the first sitting of the third term of the 13th Perak State Legislative Assembly went on as planned on March 31 at the grounds of the Perak Darul Ridzuan building in Ipoh. Soon after his arrival that morning, Sultan Nazrin Muizzuddin Shah inspected a guard of honour mounted by the General Operations Force.
An hour earlier, Perak Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Dr Zambry Abdul Kadir and all the state assemblymen started arriving and took their respective places.
However, whilst the Barisan Nasional assemblymen came in their ceremonial attire befitting the occasion, 26 opposition assemblymen purposely chose to be different. They were all clad in black.
March 31 was a very significant day for Perak’s state legislature. It was the “first appearance” of Sultan Nazrin as the new sultan of Perak, and to mark this important occasion, the state ruler was robed in his full royal regalia.
Datuk Seri Mohd Nizar Jamaluddin (Pakatan state chairman) told reporters that the black attire was “a mark of solidarity with (opposition leader Datuk Seri) Anwar Ibrahim”, who is now in Sungai Buloh prison serving his five-year jail sentence for sodomising his former aide.
It was also to show their continued support for 13 Pas members who were recently convicted and given a prison sentence for taking part in an illegal demonstration six years ago in Kuala Kangsar.
Finally, it was in protest of the Goods and Services Tax (GST), which was to be implemented on April 1.
Didn’t anybody tell Nizar that the sultan of Perak has nothing to do with Anwar’s incarceration and the conviction of the 13 Pas members nor was his royal highness, in any way, involved in the implementation of GST?
These misguided assemblymen should realise that a state legislature comprises not only the assemblymen but also the state ruler.
The sultan is an integral part of the legislature, and no bills passed by them can become law until and unless the ruler gives his royal assent.
Clearly upset by their disrespect and lack of decorum, Sultan Nazrin later refused to participate in a photography session and a reception (as originally planned) with all the assemblymen.
Dr Zambry was understandably furious with their antics. “Whatever explanation which they may give is unacceptable,” he had said.
The day after, on April 1, he told reporters: “Yesterday was a historic day for the sultan as it was his maiden appearance at the assembly as the 35th Sultan of Perak, and he was in his official royal attire to have the event recorded for the national archives.”
This historic day had, unfortunately, been torpedoed by the antics of the opposition, Dr Zambry had said.
“I consider the incident as reflecting their true attitude, and they did not show any remorse over their arrogant and ill-mannered behaviour.”
He had said if the opposition assemblymen were “truly sincere and had merely wanted to protest, why chose yesterday and not today?”
I reckon many amongst us can still recall the long history of defiance and disrespect by the Pakatan politicians towards the Perak royalty. It happened before in 2009, when Nizar lost his seat as menteri besar.
The entire Pakatan assemblymen had boycotted the oath-taking ceremony by Dr Zambry as the new menteri besar at the Istana Iskandariah in Kuala Kangsar.
There was another awful incident in May 2009 when Sultan Nazrin (who was then the Regent) was delayed by several hours by these same opposition assemblymen before he was finally able to enter the house.
When the state legislative assembly began to debate the royal address on April 1, Datuk Mohd Khusairi Abdul Taib (Perak BN Backbenchers Club chairman) openly lambasted the Pakatan assemblymen for their disrespect of the sultan.
The assembly erupted into chaos when expressions of biadab (rude) and kurang ajar (disrespect) were hurled across the floor.
Whilst this was going on inside the legislative assembly, 300 people from several non-governmental organisations gathered in front of the Perak Darul Ridzuan building, expressing their anger at the disrespectful assemblymen.
Truly, what goes around comes around. Protest begets protest.
When Perak Legislative Assembly Speaker Datuk S.K. Devamany was later able to talk to the media, he said: “The sultan was present to officiate the assembly... If you are not happy with the state of affairs, show your dissatisfaction outside, not in the presence of the sultan.”
The speaker said: “Yesterday, the opening ceremony was not in the Dewan. They should have worn black today, not yesterday. That was a ceremony. Can you imagine, we invite them to our house for dinner or a ceremony and we inform them to come in a certain attire, and we give them the due respect and you come in not respecting the host... that is not our culture.”
Denying any intention to show disrespect to the ruler, Nizar later told the media that wearing black “does not violate any rules and regulations of the Standing Orders”.
He added that, “Although coats and ties have been the long- standing formal attire during previous state assemblies, it is not a must”.
Nizar should know that houses of legislatures are not just regulated by laws and regulations.
They are also regulated by conventions, custom and traditions. Respect for the ruling monarch is a convention observed since ancient times.
As expected, the social media went abuzz with the incident. A popular blogger came out with a comment which says it all. He wrote: “How do Perakians say it? ‘Kurang hajor!’” (http://justread-whatever.blogspot.com/)
On April 4, I asked Malaysia’s elder statesman, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, for his comments. We had finished our meeting and he was not in any hurry to leave. He said, with his usual smile: “The assemblymen have clearly shown disrespect to the sultan. It should not have happened.”
It was Ralph Waldo Emerson who said: “Life is short, but there is always time enough for courtesy.”
Robert Anson Heinlein, novelist and science fiction writer, wrote: “A dying culture invariably exhibits personal rudeness.”
I guess the 26 Perak opposition politicians have not heard or read either of them.
The writer formerly served the Attorney-General’s Chambers before he left for private practice, the corporate sector and then the academia