When Secretaries are The Boss/The MACC is Basically the ACA But Worse

When the secretary decided to declare that the state building be closed, his power and authority in the state is questionable. Does he have the authority? Who does he work for? Isn't his superior the Speaker himself? Who should the police actually listen to?

I don't want to touch on the legal issues because constitutional experts are popping out everywhere at the moment. Just want to touch on the logic.

The answer, logically, is simple. He answers to the Speaker and therefore the police should also answer to the Speaker. The Speaker has got nothing to do with the executive and therefore the police in this case should not take any other order apart from the Speaker himself - reason being, he has the authority within that sphere.

But somehow, nothing make sense anymore in Perak. It's like one day the Speaker announced, "Okay tomorrow we'll have a meeting! Everybody should be there...except you 6". Then the secretary walks past the Speaker with a notice in hand, and pasted the notice on the meeting room door, "NO ONE CAN ENTER THIS ROOM FOR...ERR...WHENEVER IT IS THE SPEAKER WANTS TO CONVENE A MEETING". Now if this happens in an office administration somewhere, who would the security guard listen to? The boss or the secretary?

It just does not make sense with whatever it is that's happening in Perak. The fact that scores of FRU unit squads would block the state building to listen to instructions by the secretary not only show how bias they are, but it shows how much these people understands bureaucracy. Sad.

In fact these police people are really something. One minute we have the IGP saying that the police has no authority in Parliament buildings -- you know, to stop those thugs from harassing Karpal -- and then few days later we have these same PDRM calling upon units of FRU to block a state secretariat building. I know it may not be the Parliament, but it's almost the same isn't it? It's where lawmakers meet to make law.

I like how the UMNO people are all over the place with this issue and saying that the meeting under the tree is making us a laughing stock in the democratic world. Well, it may not be perfect but it surely isn't 7 FRU units blocking lawmakers from entering the state building upon instruction by a secretary and letting BN supporters (laymen with no authority whatsoever) make a picket and denying these lawmakers their right to meet. That, in particular, is sad.

Let's move on to other issues cause the Perak debacle is sad...sadly, saddening, sad.

MACC have been so bias it's amazing. First there's the Khalid Ibrahim issue, with the statement and all. Now, we have the MACC saying that the Perak Speaker can be investigated and not immune. Sure he's not immune. If he kills a person, go get him. If he accepts bribe, go ahead. But if he does things within his duty, then he is immune.

In what way is he not immune in these last few weeks? It was all done according to the constitution I believe.

Then MACC also made a statement (when I say MACC I mean the head, that Said guy) that so far there's not a single genuine case of money politics in the offing. Seriously, who is going to believe that? It's like he's saying, sure there are thousands of reports on money politics but not one is true. These people, who reported are liars, including Tun Dr. Mahathir, Tengku Rithauddeen, Abdullah Badawi, Muhyiddin Yassin, Ku Li and all the likes who claimed that there are such cases, they are all liars.

But seriously, with claims by those who reported these cases saying that they haven't even been asked to cooperate and give statement then that just makes the MACC look ridiculous. Surely logically the MACC have to question thousands of people. I don't think that has been done at all. Not only have they not questioned people from Pakatan who lodged report, but even the ones from UMNO have not been questioned (evidenced by the statement made by the 2 UMNO seniors who reported Abdullah and Najib for money politics)

They have the cheek to say that there aren't any cases worth pursuing so far when they haven't even started on anything!

It's sad that the hopes we have in battling corruption is handed and put upon the shoulders of another incompetent authority. The ACA was highly unreliable and ineffective. The MACC it seems, is worse because they are supposed to be independent.

Remember 2009 people. 2009 is the year where authorities, constitutionality and democracy went haywire. This is the year that corruption breeds at its worst. Come 2013, the vote should reflect what we've seen so far (at least what I've seen so far).

Sad...