外媒歪论:王宫忍不住出声

马来西亚近日的政变登上国际媒体头条,无人不晓,当全世界在携手并肩抗疫情,大马的领袖却在争权谋位。

在众多外媒评论中,最多就是提到老马的“高调”辞职,以及关于老马的“伟绩”。

而英国的The Guardian在这篇言论中,却严厉评击这场政变,把矛头指向王室。

于3月3日刊登,题为《卫报对王室政变的看法:国家元首推翻历史性大选》的评论文章,影射大马王室利用最近的政治动荡来策划政变,这违背了人民在509选举中的意愿。

关于这场政变的“真正真相”,大家心里有数,都是因为争权以及内斗而引起,绝对和人民的利益没有任何关系。

做惯反对党的火箭,没有反省检讨

如今,西马行动党领袖在砂拉越不断解说“来龙去脉”。真的是做惯反对党,一下台立刻就原形毕露,到处评击他人和砂拉越,却始终没有检讨自己。这或许就是做反对党的好处,把责任归咎给他人,错的永远是他人。

回到The Guardian的评论。 大马王宫罕见地发文告回应,澄清该评论明显与事实不符。 王宫事务官Ahmad Fadil Shamsudd说:

“作为国家王宫王室事务官,我对英国媒体评论文章的误导性,感到震惊。事实上,大马的议会民主制度,是源自西敏寺制度。

国家元首受到大马《联邦宪法》第43条文的约束,随著原任首相和内阁辞职,须选出和委任一名新首相。

因此,前首相敦马哈迪在2月24日中午告知国家元首,他不再拥有多数国会议员的信任,并交出辞呈。于是,国家元首援引联邦宪法第40(2)(a)条文,行使其自由裁量权委任新首相。

根据联邦宪法第43(2)(a)条文,国家元首可以委任一名国会议员为首相,只要他获得多数国会议员的信任。”

国家元首下达成任何结论之前,与所有国会议员和各个政党党魁会面,这可看出国家王宫显然已经超出了其义务的范围。”

As the Comptroller of the Royal Household of Istana Negara, I am appalled by the level of inaccuracy and misleading tone of this editorial by a renowned UK-based media outlet, particularly given the fact that the subject matter, Malaysia’s Parliamentary Democracy, is based on the Westminster system.

The King is bound by Article 43 of the Federal Constitution to select and appoint a prime minister following the resignation of the previous prime minister and his Cabinet.

This was why when former premier Mahathir Mohamad informed Sultan Abdullah on Feb 24 that he no longer enjoyed the confidence of a majority of the members of the federal Parliament and then resigned, the King was obligated by Article 40(2)(a) of the Federal Constitution to exercise his discretion in appointing the next prime minister.

He is also obligated by Article 43 (2)(a) of the Federal Constitution to appoint as prime minister a member of the House who, in his judgment, is likely to command the confidence of the majority of the members of that House。

Istana Negara went above and beyond its call of obligation by meeting all the MPs and the leaders of the various political parties, prior to king arriving at any conclusion.”

当时,人民见证大马政坛的超级roti canai,一下安华说有足够支持来成为首相,一下又“翻”说支持老马,大家都说有足够支持,一些国会议员也立场模糊或换来换去,但是最高元首确实是与所有国会议员会面,才做出结论,如文告所言,真的是已经超出了其义务的范围!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s