'Using the twisted logic often applied by Umnoputras, calling the sultan as chief executive is an insult to the royalty.'

Sultan is 'chief executive', says lawyer

Gerard Samuel Vijayan: Why is Salehudin Saidin, a private lawyer and a member of Mais (Selangor State Islamic Religious Council) giving his legal opinion on behalf of the palace?

The sultan's principal legal adviser in such matters is the state legal adviser (SLA) and not his own private lawyer, assuming that Salehudin advises the sultan on his private legal matters.

Any matter pertaining to the powers of the sultan and the provisions of the state and federal constitution ought to have been referred by the sultan to the SLA before giving his consent to the appointment of the SS (state secretary) for an advisory opinion but instead the palace seems to have relied on outside legal advice.

In any event the chief secretary to the government has clarified that the consent of the sultan is not required as the final decision rests with the federal PSC (Public Services Commission) and that the sultan is merely consulted out of courtesy. Then why the need for the swearing-in ceremony if the SS takes office from the date of his letter of appointment by the PSC?

Ong Guan Sin: Using the twisted logic often applied by Umnoputras, calling the sultan as chief executive is an insult to the royalty. Let me explain.

Malaysia is a democratic country when executive power comes from election by the people. It means the sultan must be put to election by the people, and the sultan can be defeated and therefore changed at the election.

Is this not insulting the royalty and therefore treasonous? I rest my case.

P Dev Anand Pillai: I would beg to differ with Mais member Salehuddin. Can we then use the same analogy with the Agong? Is he the chief executive of the country?

If executive power derives from the Agong, then according to Salehuddin's analogy, the PM is only the administrative head of the country. Our parliamentary democracy is where the monarch only plays a role of a head of state with ceremonial duties and not executive powers, even the council of rulers have a deadline in which they can give their consent to constitutional amendments failing which it becomes law anyway, so based on your analogy it looks as though we are an absolute monarchy.

Our system is where the power comes from the people via elections from which the party that wins the most seats, the head of whom is invited by the monarch to form the government. If the monarch is the chief executive, then he doesn't need a PM or a MB. Your analogy sir, with due respect does not make any sense.

Dark Knight: How did we get to this sad state of affairs - the king and certain sultans being drawn into controversial issues that undermine the constitution of Malaysia?

Beginning with Dr Mahathir Mohamad - the biggest ursurper of the constitution for his own ends - the country has progressively gone down the drains as a beacon of Islamic democracy. Today, the BN government, in its do-or-die battle to remain in power at all costs, have used and abused the royalty for its own cause.

Everyone who is aligned with the BN, be they be civil servants or sycophants of the ruling government - the police, the AG (attorney-general), the courts and the MACC - have forsaken their duties and democratic principles of good governance.

Just look with what is happening in the Selangor issue. Democracy and the separation of powers as enshrined in our constitution are no longer sacrosanct. They have been ignored without care.

Yobama: Although I did not have a legal education (but my education was legal), I know that whatever 'executive' powers the sultans had, have been removed by ex-PM Mahathir Mohamad during the 1993 constitutional crisis.

So where did Salehuddin get his information to say the sultan is the chief executive? Does the sultan run the state? Does he attend the exco meetings? The sultan, with all due respect, only officiates the opening of the state assemblies and signs all bills passed by the assembly.

Even if he does not give consent, the bills become law after 30 days. So where is the logic in saying he has executive powers? This man from Mais is living in his dreamland and should be awaken by someone.

What is happening to this country of ours? Umno is bringing us to the edge of the cliff with all kinds of stupidity emerging day after day, ad infinitum.

Khalid: We attended under protest

DontPlayGod: Enough of politicking every government function by Umno. Common sense dictates that, since the state secretary (as its name suggests) serves the state government, then by right, the state should have the final say in appointing the state secretary, or at the very least, the state government should be consulted and its approval sought before appointing the state secretary.

In the present situation, it's just like a head of department being told that the vacancy for his senior assistant has been filled without him knowing who this person is.

Suthale Pee: You did the right thing, Khalid. The sultan's duty ends the minute the swearing-in ceremony is over. The number one office boy Mohd Khusrin Munawi need not take any oath whatsoever but maybe, only maybe he can mix with the drivers and other office boys in the menteri besar's office for now.

He could additionally be assigned to sweep and clean all the toilets in the building. Khalid, go on doing the right thing and we are all with you.

Cala: MB Khalid Ibrahim was there under protest, what's next? Both Khusrin Munawi and the MB are in a situation of incomplete contract.

It is a situation, as argued by Williamson (2008) that in a complex world, two transacting parties have to work together for whatever reason, but each realises that the terms of the contract cannot be spelt out in full at the point of transaction, nor the future transacting conditions so stable that normal contracting terms are applicable.

To Williamson, who was a Nobel Prize co-winner, as long as a relationship is defined in a contracting term, transaction cost economic principle applies. To operationalise it however, both parties must agree to private ordering, meaning in case of dispute, both agree to subject the dispute to any other party to resolve it other than the court, the same way arbitration is conducted.

If Khusrin has faith in Pakatan, he may consider this option as a way out of the current impasse.

Anonymous_408d: If what Khalid says is true, and the appointment of Khusrin has been done without regard to the state constitution, then Khusrin is very, very wrong in going ahead and accepting it and going through the motions of being sworn in, etc.

Khusrin is the former head of Jais (Selangor Islamic Religious Department), a religious body, but if he is going against the constitution then what kind of message is he sending out? Is he saying as a former Jais man, that rules can be ignored? How are the people supposed to respect rules if that is the case?

How are the people supposed to respect that religious body if its former head is doing something that might be described as suspicious and unbecoming? What is his motive in all of this? Who is he actually taking instructions from?

It is hard to believe that Khalid would deliberately go against the constitution without feeling that he is in the right. That is a very difficult stand to take, and the fact that he is still sticking to it means he is very sure of what he is doing.

Amaso: It is a wise move by MB Khalid to show respect to Selangor sultan, otherwise certain groups will sensationalise the issue had he not attended the swearing-in ceremony. Next step: maintain the momentum on amending the state constitution to restore the sultan's power.

Why was S'gor MB kept in the dark?

The above is a selection of comments posted by Malaysiakini subscribers. Only paid subscribers can post comments. Over the past one year, Malaysiakinians have posted over 100,000 comments. Join the Malaysiakini community and help set the news agenda. Subscribe now .