From: sa2263263@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg (ROLAND U)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean
Subject: Re: Discussion on Malaysian sultanate amendments
Date: 27 Jan 93 10:06:00 GMT
Followup-To: soc.culture.singapore,soc.culture.asean
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

>I do not recall reading this. Which date was this? If the sultan were in KL,
>he would be very stupid to go a government hostpital. The private hospitals
>are better equipped and better service.
>	I do not recall any special rooms for the sultans in the hospitals that
>I had visited. Of course in Sabah only but I once visited Klang hospital. 
>I do not recall seing any special rooms for the sultans/kings. The point I'm
>trying to make is that not ALL hospitals MAY have those so called special
>privileges. It could be blown out of proportion.
> 
>: > 
>: >Do you know that there are equipments in Miri that is reserved only for
>: >Shell staff? I believe the same is true in Trengganu.
>: >: 	The properties of the kings are the property of the state governments.
>: >: >By letting the property rot, will be a great disservice to the state.
>: >: Not true. The properties of the royalty can only be used by the royalty and is
>: >: considered by them to be theirs. By not allocating money, the onus to upkeep
>: > 
>: Ri^ht, as you say, Mahatir has been allocated one. However, the Sultans have only
>: been allocated 8 or 9, but how many do they have ? 20 to 30 luxury cars..not to
>: include those for thier bodyguards and so on and so forth.
> 
>The others are not alocated to them, they bought them. Allocated and bought are
>two different things. Why don't you count the number of cars owned by Dr. 
>Mahathir, his wife, his children etc. as well?
>: > 
>: >: their properti will be on the royalty. This will encourage them to have fewer
>: >I wonder how Dr. Mahathir will feel if he were required to maintain his
>: >allocated cars. How about all the other government officers? Even the 
>: >company officers?
> 
>: It would be reasonable if they government were to maintain the cars that were
>: allocated to them but not the excess inventory. I sure the government did
>: not allocate private jets and yachts.
>The allocation of private jets /yachts is up to the State government. In fact
>Sabah used to have a private jet and even yachts for our Chief ministers. It
>all depends on how rich the state is.
> 
>: > 
>: >: palaces, cars, etc etc
>: >: > 
>: >: >How about the governers, the yang di pertuan negaras of Sabah, Sarawak, are
>: >: >they also not entittled for the privileges?
>: >: >	Why should the kings be the only ones targeted? Shouldn't the other
>: >: >heads of states also affected?
>: >: > 
>: >: This "targeting" only started because the royalty have gone too far in their
>: >                                            ^^^^^^^
>: >So you want all chinese to be deported just because of the actions of a few
>: >chinese gangsters.
>: > 
>: If want to counter-argue in this childish manner, be my guest. it has already
>: been reported in the papers, that all with the exception of one ruler, have
>: been accused of misdeeds. If it were only one ruler, this crisis would not
>I thought I'm reading the same newspapers but I do not recall the misdeeds of
>all of them. Unless you consider getting involved in business INDIRECTLY is 
>also a misdeed? Wow, how many politicians in Singapore, Malaysia and the rest
>of the world are guilty of these misdeeds.
> 
>: arise.
> 
>: >: abuses. Although, some may doubt the authencity of this allegations, like
>: >: the folks say " Ain't no smoke without fire ". If the governers or other
>: > 
> 
>: >Same thing with other allegations. Just because some government officers are
>: >corrupt, do not mean that all of them must be punished.
>: >Rule of law:
>: >	Innocent until proven guilty,
>: >	Guilt cannot be inherited.
>: > 
>: >Obviously you've broken both laws but then you're not alone.
>: Like I said, majority has been accused and found guilty by the masses.
>Without any defence at all? What kind of justice is this?
> 
>: > 
>: >: high figure were to misuse ther authority, they will most definately be targetted
>: >: and in their case, sacked.
>: >                     ^^^^^^
>: >To sacked is fair, but to remove the POST entirely? Just because there are
>: >corrupt custom officers, should we abolish/reduce the number of custom 
>: >officers?
>: > 
>: The royalty still does exist. it is only their immunity to prosecution that is
>: gone. Immunity to prosecution is not the royalty.
> 
>You have not read my next paragraph.
> 
>: >: >Question of immunity only during official duties is very hard to establish so
>: >: >was not implemented in all other countries. Do you know that the President of
>: >: >Singapore also have full immunity? So are the other heads of state in Malaysia,
>: >: >and other commonwealth nations, and even all the royalty of the Britain, unlike
>: >: >Malaysia where the immunity is only for the Sultans.
>: >: > 
>: >: The head of states are elected by the people and the people feel that they
>: >                     ^^^^^^^^^^^
>: >This is a blatant lie. You should check with your facts first.
>: Not really. The president of Singapore is elected by the government who is 
> 
>                                            ^^^^^^^
>He is not elected but selected. Do not confuse the non-Singaporean.
>: elected by the people. It is not inherited or decreed .
>                                                ^^^^^^^
>Just because the party is elected by 60% of the people, does not mean that
>even 50% agree to the choice of President.
> 
>It is decreed by the PM, that is why your system is subject to abuse although
>not as bad as Philippines or US system.
>	IN fact LKY proposes an even stronger President elected by everyone,
>but non-political(not actively involved in any party), who not only have full
>immunity but full control of the assets of Singapore.
>	Unfortunately it is very hard to establish the non-political nature.
>In fact the heriditary kings are the best non-political power broker there 
>ever be. As long as they are rich and cannot be bribed(if you're rich, it is
>not easy to bribe you).
> 
> 
>: > 
>: >: have done wrong, believe me, they will force the wrong doers to go..e.g Brazil's
>: >: ex-president. The royalty of Britain is only existing because of Queen Elizabeth
>: >: and because of their entertainment value..;]
>: > 
>: >How come they have more power than even our present kings? EVen much richer?
>: Richer ? Perhaps. More power ?? Certainly not. If they had more power, the
>: papers there are most definately not going to get away with their reporting.
>Have you seen any attack on the Queen, who is equivalent to the Sultans in 
>Malaysia. The ones under attack were the princes. But then they have no law
>stopping the criticism of the rulers.
>: Besides, the royalty there do not interfere with the government at all.
> 
>What makes you think they royalty in Malaysia interfere with the government
>unless you consider asking for contracts as interfering?
>	But aren't you aware that the same is true in UK?
>	The royalty in UK have no reason to block any bills but there are a 
>lot of reasons to block the bills in Malaysia because they do not even follow
>the constitution. Or it may cause problems. The only time that I know
>of the sultanate blocking bills is when this present amendment is passed but
>this is clearly against the constitution.
> 
>: > 
>: >: > 
>: >: >: There have been tales of manslaughter and in one case, murder, with
>: >: >: allegations made in parliment that a sultan killed his golf caddie.
>: >: >This was a very old story but only come out now. You may wonder why?
>: >: > 
>: >: If I were fighting a war of words and trust, anything I can use for ammo
>: >: will be used.
>: 	So your motive is just grudge and nothing to do with justice or even
>: >common sense.


To be continued when soc.culture.malaysia comes out.

Roland U.
sa2263263@ntuvax.ntu.ac.sg " We Shall All Die " 
Xref: sparky soc.culture.singapore:492 soc.culture.asean:9284