Perak Pakatan leaders have further questioned Ganesan’s legitimacy as Speaker, piling pressure on the BN.
They claim that even if Ganesan was rightfully elected – “which he was not” – as Speaker on 7 May, “his failure to cease practice as a lawyer would have disqualified him”.
The Pakatan leaders cite Article XXX VIA (5) of the Perak Constitution which states that a Speaker would be disqualified if after three months from his date of appointment, he remains as a member of any board of directors or management or if he works for or engages in the affairs of any organisation (except for welfare or charitable organisations).
They produced an information sheet from the Bar confirming that Ganesan was the sole proprietor of a firm as at 11 August, he had a valid practising certificate and his status was “active”.
I got in touch with a senior lawyer who told me that having a valid practising certificate alone may not be sufficient to prove that Ganesan was engaging in business as a practising lawyer. “The Perak Pakatan leaders may have to show that Ganesan had actually engaged in business as a practising lawyer or carried out related transactions.”
Ganesan, for his part, has pointed out that he had written to the Bar Council on 4 August informing them that he would cease business on 6 August, according to a Malaysiakini report.
Pakatan leaders say the next “legitimate” State Assembly meeting has been scheduled for Wednesday, 2 September – six months after their last sitting under the Democracy Tree.
Nizar has thus called on the BN to respect the rule of law and recognise V Sivakumar as the only legitimate Speaker of the Perak State Assembly.