It is recognized that while the legal tussle is still on-going, we need some one to act as Menteri Besar.  Who is more qualified to act in that position – Nizar or Zambry?  That depends on who enjoys a higher legal and moral standing for that purpose?  After the Aziz judgment, it has to be Nizar.

This is the reason why judge Aziz had rejected Zambry’s request for a stay of execution immediately after he delivered the judgment the previous day – to avoid aborting justice at this stage. 

And what is the ground put up by Zambry for wanting the stay order?  According to his lawyer Cecil Abraham, it is to stop Nizar from approaching the Sultan for dissolution of the state assembly for a state-wide election.  His rationale is that, once an election is held, Zambry’s appeal is rendered academic.

Now, let us examine this rationale.  Assuming there is no order to stay execution, and as a result, Nizar succeeds in dissolving the assembly and an election is held, how would that do injustice to Zambry?  Is Zambry saying that in an election, his party would be unfairly treated by our electoral system?  But that would be a ridiculous suggestion, as our Election Commission has been overtly pro-Barisan Nasional and all the government institutions and public media have always been heavily abused to favour BN in every election.   Or is Zambry saying that he has a much stronger case in court?  But that would be a far fetched assertion, as it is the considered legal opinion that the balance tips in Nizar’s favour in fact and in law.  This opinion is supported by Aziz’s detailed and meticulous judgment that took him more than one hour to read out.

In fact, a fresh election for Perak is not only a fair solution where none would suffer injustice, but the only practical way out of the present state of near anarchy in the state, with both parties fighting tooth and nail (physically at times) to claim authority to rule, while a host of suits and counter suits are pending in the high courts, which arose from the illegal power grab engineered by Prime Minister Najib Razak in early February.

That BN has been doggedly determined to avoid an election despite such compelling circumstances only reveals that it is a party working for only its self-interests.  Its policy is anti-rakyat in that it is not only depriving the people the right to choose their own government, but dooming them to suffer political and economic turmoil in the years ahead. 

And the rash action by judge Ramli to grant Zambry the stay order in circumstances that draw consternation only worsens the image of the judiciary while further eroding confidence in the government.  

Apart from wanting in rationale in his judgment, the lightning speed with which Ramly had granted the order must have caught many people by surprise – receiving the application at 0930 hrs, convening the hearing at 1130 hrs and passing the judgment at 1300 hrs, thus reversing judge Aziz’s rejection of stay order in only 21 hours.  What a superb performance by our courts known for their snail’s pace.  (I recall that following Anwar Ibrahim’s sodomy conviction in 2000, it took the court of appeal three years before it began hearing Anwar’s appeal).  But, is it not a bit too hasty to reach decision on an issue so important that it could have changed the course of history?

And on such an important issue, why did judge Ramli sit alone, bereft of the usual panel of judges of at least three in a court of appeal hearing?  Such breaking of its own rule can only be justified in an emergency situation where the slightest delay in granting an order may result in irreparable injury to a party.  Has such a situation developed for Zambry?  What injury would Zambry suffer, if it takes several days instead of several hours for the  court to reach a decision?  Or did judge Ramly feel the same sense of urgency as expressed by lawyer Abraham that any delay in granting the order may precipitate the catastrophe to BN in the form of a state-wide election for Perak?  But should the judiciary’s conduct be dictated by such political manouvring?

It is understood that Nazir’s lawyer will be presenting his application to the court of appeal to set aside Ramly’s order today.  Let’s see whether the same court would accord Nazir’s application with the same dispatch.