Voon Lee Shan
KUCHING (Apr 26): Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) president Voon Lee Shan points out that the Candidates Agreement (CA) is not a political gimmick, as what has been called by Deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri Dr James Masing.
Rather, Voon said the agreement was imposed upon PBK’s election candidates, requiring them to stay true to the party’s struggles and vision, as well as to uphold the confidence of the voters.
Under the CA, Voon as the party top leader would have to fork up RM50 million to be compensated to PBK, should he leave the party to become either an independent politician or a member of a different political entity; for any PBK candidate ‘jumping ship’, the penalty is RM20 million.
In this regard, Voon said he had been approached last year to ‘jump ship’ and dissolve PBK, but chose not to do so because of his steadfast belief in and commitment to the party, and also to the people of Sarawak.
“In response to the remarks made by Deputy Chief Minister Tan Sri Datuk Amar Dr James Masing (in the media recently), there’s no need for him to press the panic button.
“The PBK has placed a price tag of RM20 million on each of our potential election candidate who would be contesting under PBK banner, because we believe that our product ‘In Quest Of Independence’ is saleable, and each of our candidates is using ‘this product’, which is worth more than RM20 million,” stressed Voon in a statement issued yesterday.
He said he had discovered that a few of PBK aspiring candidates had been approached by a number of political rivals, who had persuaded the candidates to jump ship or to bail out from contesting.
This, he added, was also a contributing factor towards the drafting of the CA.
“Such act is a serious matter to us because these political opponents are finding ways to derail PBK and its leaders, ensuring that PBK would never achieve its vision and mission.”
Voon also highlighted PBK’s belief that politicians and political ideals must never be put for sale because this was never the objective of democracy.
“With PBK having gained the confidence of the voters over the past two years, and being seen as a serious contender to capture the Sarawak government in the coming state election, it is expected that political opponents have felt the heat of our (PBK’s) presence,” he said.
On a separate matter, Voon said he appreciated Masing’s awareness of the provision under Article 17(7) of the Sarawak Constitution, stating: “Any person who has voluntarily given an undertaking to the State Legislative Assembly (DUN) Speaker in writing that he will not resign his membership from the political party for which he stood or to which he belonged when he is elected to the DUN, shall, if he resigns from the political party after being elected, be disqualified in the interest of public integrity and morality from continuing to be a member of the DUN – with effect from the date when he resigned from the political party.”
In this regard, Voon said the provision was ‘still a good law to protect the dignity of DUN Sarawak’.
However, he said the said Article of the Sarawak Constitution could provide no protection to political parties should the elected representatives jump ship.
“It was for this reason that PBK came with the CA – after all, the Sarawak Constitution does not say political parties cannot protect their interests in the event of their elected representatives wishing to jump ship.
“The PBK does not see anything wrong with the CA,” he pointed out.
Moreover, he said having studied laws of freedom of association in many countries including those in the UK, the US, India, Pakistan, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, he insisted that drafting the CA was the correct thing to do for PBK.
“The process to draft the CA included getting input from foreign lawyers and also a foreign law professor.”
While pleading to be corrected if he was wrong, Voon said the constitutionality of Article 17(7) of the Sarawak Constitution, which came into force on Nov 24, 1976, had yet to be tested before the court.
“Thus, for Tan Sri Dr James Masing to say that our CA is unconstitutional and going against the right to form or the freedom of association, is incorrect and it may mislead the public.
“The mechanism (behind CA) is to discourage party-hopping.
“Calling it a gimmick is an insult to democracy and to the spirit of pro-independence Sarawakians.
“It is observed that Article 51 of the Federal Constitution mandates the requirement of a resignation by any parliamentarian, and this should be a prelude to anti-hopping laws.
“Why should a parliamentarian resign, unless he or she intends to switch loyalty and allegiance?
“Article 53 of the Federal Constitution also provides an answer to anti-hopping laws when it calls for disqualification of an elected representative.
“Further, Article 49 provides against double membership – discouraging a parliamentarian to leave his or her party and to become an Independent. This has an overtone of double membership,’” said Voon.
The post PBK’s candidates agreement meant to protect party’s interests, not a gimmick — Voon appeared first on Borneo Post Online.