Era Najib Altantuya : Teoh Bergaduh, Satu Teori Nakal Untuk Pesongkan Kebenaran (updated)

Sumber: Klab Greenboc

Pendedahan oleh pegawai kanan Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM) bahawa Teoh Beng Hock dan Ahli Majlis Pe

rbandaran Kajang, Tan Boon Wah, bergaduh, telah mengejutkan mereka yang mengikuti prosiding inkues kematian Teoh di Mahkamah Koroner di sini.

Mohd Anuar Ismail, Pemangku Penguasa Kanan SPRM Selangor, berkata pergaduhan itu berlaku pada jam 2 pagi di tandas pejabat SPRM Selangor.

"Selepas kematian Teoh, saya dimaklumkan oleh Bulkini Paharuddin (pegawai SPRM) bahawa terdapat pergaduhan antara Boon Wah dengan si mati pada jam 2 pagi bertempat di tandas SPRM," katanya ketika ditanya peguam pemerhati SPRM, Datuk Abdul Razak Musa.

Namun berita yang mengejutkan itu menjadikan inkues lebih tidak berintegriti apabila banyak pihak mempersoalkan kebenaran pendedahan tersebut.

Ini kerana Anuar berkata beliau hanya dimaklumkan oleh Bulkini dan soalan pula di lakukan oleh peguam SPRM.

Ia seolah-olah satu lakunan di dalam Inkues untuk satu "cover-up" terhadap perbuatan jenayah yang mungkin dilakukan oleh anggota siasatan SPRM.

Sudah pasti peguam-peguam dan pegawai penyiasat SPRM bernama Mohd Anuar ini telah melakukan sesuatu "framing" yang berkemungkinannya mengikut satu "grand design" oleh satu pihak yang lebih tinggi dari mereka.

Kini, perbuatan jenayah itu hendak dialihkan kepada orang lain, hendak di tunjukkan bahawa Teoh dan Tan Boon Wah kononnya bergaduh pada pukul 2 pagi. Siapa pegawai SPRM yang menunggu sampai 2 pagi. Bagaimana beliau boleh berada di situ? Bagaimana pegawai itu tahu mereka bergaduh? Apa bahasa yang digunakan oleh kedua-dua orang itu jika benar mereka berada ditandas? Bahasa Melayu? Bhasa Inggeris? Bahasa Mandarin? Apa butir pertuturannya? Apakah Bulkini ingat dan faham apa juga buttir percakapnnya sehingga menyatakan ia satu pergaduhan? Apakah ada berlaku kejadian tumbuk menumbuk? Apakah ada saksi lain selain Bulkini yang dilaporkan mendengar pergaduhan itu?

Itu semua perlukan siasatan lanjut. Gobind bekata: “Apa yang berlaku hari ini seolah-olah SPRM hendak mendedahkan semua bukti siasatan mereka. Saya mahukan perintah mahkamah sekarang untuk menangguhkan prosiding ini supaya kami dibekalkan semua dokumen dan jadikan prosiding inkues ini sebagai perbicaraan rasuah Teoh Beng Hock,” katanya.

Ulasan GB
Di bulan puasa ini masih ada orang Islam yang tak takut berbuat dosa pendustaan.

Mahathir calls Muhyiddin a liar...well, sort of

Sumber:Malaysia Today

Lee Kuan Yew did not threaten to go to war if we did not supply water and I don't know about the sale of land to Singapore

Dr. Mahathir Mohamad

1. Tan Sri Muhyiddin spoke the truth about my persuading him to supply water to Singapore (read here). But Lee Kuan Yew did not threaten to go to war if we did not supply water. If he had done that, I think I would have stopped any further supply.

2. We were at that time trying to be friendly with Singapore in order to solve several problems. Although raw water would be supplied at 3 cent per 1000 gallons, the understanding was that in future only treated water would be supplied when our treatment plants would be ready. We would also not buy any more treated water from Singapore at 50 cent per thousand gallons when our new treatment plant in Johore is ready.

3. When we no longer needed to buy treated water from Singapore we could raise the price of raw water to Singapore without Singapore being able to raise the price of treated water to us.

4. However when we concluded the water supply agreement Singapore raised a lot of issues regarding our railway land, the CIQ (Customs, Immigration and Quarantine) at Tanjong Pagar, training flights by Singapore warplanes over Malaysia and the Central Provident Funds.

5. At that stage I realised that being friendly with Singapore did not pay.

6. I don't know about the sale of land to Singapore but as it was agreed that a treatment plant be built by Singapore in Johore, land would have to be made available.

http://chedet.co.cc/chedetblog/2009/08/sound-bites-water-for-singapor.html

Penipuan Terancang Dalam Setiap Kali Pilihanraya, Pengerusi SPR Tidak Perlu Lagi Cuba Perbodohkan Rakyat Malaysia Buat Selamanya !!

Sumber Muslimeen United

Kisah pengundi hantu ini sebenarnya bukan sekadar cakap-cakap kosong semata-mata. Malah sudah beberapa kali dibuktikan dengan fakta dan banyak laporan telah dibuat oleh pihak yang berkenaan. Namun, dek kerana kuasa dan dipelihara oleh kerajaan UMNO dan BN maka pihak SPR masih terus bermaharajalela dan menipu rakyat. Mereka seolah-olah menganggap bahawa rakyat Malaysia bangang macam puak-puak UMNO itu sendiri. Ini berlaku dalam setiap kali pilihanraya di negara kita. SPR sebenarnya jelas khianat kepada rakyat dan negara kita sendiri.

Orang-orang yang dipertanggungjawabkan untuk melaksanakan satu pilihanraya yang adil dan telus iaitu SPR telah menipu, memutar belit, mengubah dan menambah fakta pengundi. Malah terdapat juga isu pengundi yang sudah beratus tahun hidup tapi masih ada dalam senarai daftar. Itu belum lagi termasuk nama-nama pengundi yang terlalu ramai mendiami sesebuah rumah.

Kenyataan SPR begitu mudah, mungkin nama-nama itu pernah berdaftar di rumah tersebut sebelum penghuninya pindah. Masalahnya timbul ialah kes yang berlaku melibatkan rumah yang didiami oleh pemilik asal dan bukan rumah sewa. Kejadian penipuan SPR ini bermula sejak zaman Tan Sri Rashit lagi. Selepas beliau meninggalkan SPR, kita sangka semuanya akan berakhir. Rupa-rupanya SPR bertambah teruk tatkala digantikan dengan Tan Sri Aziz.

Kini pilihanraya kecil sudah menjadi seperti medan perang. Jika dulu polis digunakan, tetapi kini di Permatang Pasir Angkatan Tentera Malaysia (ATM) pula dikerah ke sana. Semua ini jelas sekali menakut-nakutkan rakyat. SPR bertanggungjawab untuk merencanakan agenda jahat ini. Apa yang penting ialah memastikan BN menang, biarpun atas kertas dan realitinya parti itu memang akan kalah.

Justeru itulah, kita gusar jika masalah SPR ini tidak dapat dibendung maka bagaimanakah kita dapat menghadapi Pilihanraya Umum ke-13 akan datang?. Cuba lihat kepada bukti penipuan SPR ini, apakah lagi alasan yang mahu diberikan agaknya? Jika dilihat pada buku daftar pemilih mungkin ramai yang menganggap pengundi ini belum cukup umur untuk mengundi dalam pilihan raya akan datang kerana beliau dilahirkan pada tahun 1990 dan umurnya baru mencecah 17 tahun lebih. Bagaimanapun, semakan di lawan web SPR mendapati beliau dilahirkan pada tahun 1890. Yang lebih menghairankan, sebelum ini namanya tidak tersenarai sebagai pemilih dan hanya dikesan dimasukkan dalam ruang daftar tambahan.

Bukti jelas, sila klik imej untuk besarkan gambar fakta SPR di atas

Beliau adalah Nor Aishah Bt. Ahmad yang mengundi di Lokaliti Batas Tinggi di Daerah mengundi Paya dalam DUN Santan di Parlimen Padang Besar. Bayangkan pengundi tersebut sudah berusia 117 tahun lebih dan sekiranya masih hidup beliau mungkin salah seorang penduduk tertua di negeri Perlis. Malah, siasatan dilakukan di Kampung Paya Batas Tinggi dan sekitarnya mendapati tiada siapapun mengenali pengundi tersebut. Bukankah ini penipuan jahat yang dilakukan oleh SPR. Sebenarnya banyak kes yang dikesan tentang kes seperti ini. Soalnya, sampai bilakan ia akan terus berlaku?. Pakatan Rakyat perlu bertindak pantas untuk mendesak agar SPR berlaku adil dan telus dalam mengendalikan pilihanraya di Malaysia. Jika tidak, sudah pasti harapan baru untuk melihat kerajaan persekutuan bertukar tangan dalam pilihanraya umum akan datang pasti akan berkecai jua akhirnya.

[Cerita penipuan SPR ini sebenarnya tidak perlu diselindungkan lagi, kerana mereka harus ingat bahawa ramai juga kakitangan SPR sendiri adalah penyokong Pakatan Rakyat. Begitu juga di Jabatan Pendaftaran Negara (JPN) sendiri. Mereka inilah yang telah memberikan maklumat tentang penipuan terancang yang dilakukan oleh SPR. Malah mereka dipaksa untuk melakukan kerja jahat itu termasuk hingga mengeluarkan kad pengenalan kepada Pendatang Asing Tanpa Izin (PATI) dalam setiap kali pilihanraya. Kes ini jelas berlaku di Sabah, hingga menyebabkan pendatang asing begitu ramai sekali menetap di negeri itu tanpa sekatan dan halangan. Kejahatan SPR ini perlulah dibendung dengan segera jika kita mahu melihat amalan demokrasi tetap subur buat selama-lamanya di negara kita. selagi SPR berkompromi dengan kerajaan UMNO dan BN, maka selagi itulah harapan akan tinggal kenangan buat selamanya].

Era Najib Altantuya : Surat Misteri, Gobind Mahu Mahkamah Teruskan Siasatan (updated)

Sumber: Klab Greenboc

Surat misteri berhubung kematian Teoh, disiasat sepenuhnya oleh pihak Mahkamah.

Menurutnya, walaupun peguam Negara memberitahu mahkamah, terdapat dua atau tiga perkara yang dinyatakan dalam surat itu tidak mempunyai bukti, tetapi kandungannya didapati konsisten dengan keterangan saksi sehingga hari ini.

“Tuan Koroner telah membuat satu keputusan jelas, surat telah disiasat, walaupun peguam Negara ada memberitahu sisatan menunjukkan tidak tunjukkan sebarang bukti, namun ada dua atau tiga kenyataan yang konsisten dengan keterangan saksi sehingga hari ini,” katanya.

Dalam pada itu, Gobind yang ditemui media di lobi Mahkamah Majistret Shah Alam hari ini, memberitahu orang ramai yang mempunyai sebarang maklumat berkaitan kematian Teoh boleh mengemukakannya kepada beliau selaku wakil peguam keluarga Teoh dan juga kepada ahli keluarga Teoh sendiri.

“Rayuan kepada masyarakat sape ada pengetahuan tentang surat, kematian, siasatan dan boleh menghantar maklumat kepada saya selaku wakil peguam, atau keluarga Teoh,” katanya.

Turut hadir, anggota keluarga Teoh iaitu ayahnya Teoh Leong Hwee, ibunya Teng Shuw Hor ,abangnya Meng Kee, dan adik perempuannya, Lee Lan.

Dalam pada itu, prosiding inkues Teoh Beng Hock hari ini dimaklumkan oleh saksi ke-16, bahawa Teoh bukan suspek dalam kes yang disiasat, tetapi sebagai saksi utama.

Pegawai Penyiasat Suruhanjaya Pencegahan Rasuah Malaysia (SPRM), Mohamad Anuar Ismail menambah, tiada sebarang kekerasan dan ugutan digunakan dalam siasatan itu.

Beliau juga memberitahu Koroner, Azmil Muntapha Abas bahawa tiada sebarang masalah ketika merakamkan percakapan itu. Bagaimanapun, Teoh gagal menjawab beberapa soalan yang diajukan.

Menurut kenyataannya, seorang pegawai SPRM masih melihat Teoh tidur di sofa pejabat itu pada jam 6 pagi sebelum menemui mayatnya di tingkat 5 bangunan Plaza Masalam pada jam 1.45 petang, dipercayai terjatuh dari tingkat 14 bangunan SPRM, 16 Julai lalu.

Mohamad Anuar memberitahu demikian dalam inkues kematian Setiausaha Politik Setiausaha Exco Selangor, Teoh Beng Hock ketika ditanya oleh peguam Negara, Tan Hock Chuan. -TVS/TVA

Are Kedah and Selangor next? (A rehash article)

Sumber:Malaysia Today

What is worrying is that the fall-out of this crisis is sullying the reputation and credibility of many legal and constitutional institutions while the root cause – the despicable phenomenon of party hopping – remains unaddressed.” - Dr Shad Faruqi

THE CORRIDORS OF POWER

Raja Petra Kamarudin

Dr Shad Faruqi (read his article below) gives his opinion on what many now perceive as a Constitutional Crisis in Perak. Call it a constitutional crisis or a political crisis if you want, but Perak is not the only state that is going to fall to Barisan Nasional. Kedah and Selangor may be next on the cards.

Five Pakatan Rakyat State Assemblypersons from Kedah have already met the higher echelons of Umno and have given their undertaking to cross over en bloc once the numbers enable Barisan Nasional to form the new government in Kedah. RM100 million has been allocated to the Kedah exercise and those crossing over are going to be well rewarded.

In Selangor, Hassan Ali has been promised the post of Menteri Besar if he can convince enough of his people to join him in crossing over. This is of course further to the millions he and his gang are going to receive. So far he has only two from PAS and another two or so from PKR who have agreed to join him. So he will need a couple more to finalise the plan.

Rest assured it is all about power and money. Hassan Ali wanted to be the Menteri Besar of Selangor way back in 1999. The only problem is that in 1999 the opposition did not win Selangor. He still wants to be Menteri Besar. And if crossing over to Barisan Nasional with enough of his supporters to enable Barisan Nasional to form the new Selangor government is what it takes, then that is how he will do it as long as he can become Menteri Besar.

Even Hee Yit Fong, the State Assemblywoman who had been with DAP for 20 years, crossed over for money. She has thus far received RM15 million from Vincent Tan of Berjaya fame. She will probably be paid another RM10 million once the dust settles. It seems she needed the money to bail out her husband who was heavily in debt. This was the same situation with Lee Lam Thye who was forced to leave DAP so that he could bail out his wife from her gambling debts. Barisan Nasional, of course, helped settle all his wife’s debts once he ‘abandoned his cause’ and turned pro-establishment.

When we told Pakatan Rakyat that Perak was going to fall, they replied they have things under control. Now we are telling them that Kedah and Selangor too are in a precarious situation and they had better do something about it. Please don’t tell us you have everything under control and then, a few weeks down the road, we see these two states go the way of Perak.

Anyway, while Pakatan Rakyat figures out how to defend Kedah and Selangor from the RM200 million onslaught by Barisan Nasional, read Dr Shad Faruqi’s take on the Perak crisis.

************************************************

Legal turmoil over Perak defections
Reflecting On The Law
By SHAD SALEEM FARUQI, The Star

THERE is a constitutional impasse in Perak. The descent into naked and unprincipled struggle for power was triggered by the defection of a Barisan Nasional Assemblyman to Pakatan Rakyat and an immediate four-stroke counter-punch by the BN.

What is worrying is that the fall-out of this crisis is sullying the reputation and credibility of many legal and constitutional institutions – the Sultanate, the Election Commission, the Anti-Corruption Commission, the public prosecutor and the police. Despite this damage, the root cause – the despicable phenomenon of party hopping – remains unaddressed. Let’s examine some of these issues.

Defections: The “right” to switch parties in midstream is based on Article 10(1)(c) of the Federal Constitution which guarantees freedom of association.

However Article 10(2)(c) permits Parliament to restrict this freedom in the interest of security, public order and “morality”.

In the 80s the governments of Kelantan and Sabah passed anti-hopping laws to curb this right on the ground of morality.

However, in the Nordin Salleh (1992) case, the Federal Court declared that the anti-hopping law was unconstitutional on two grounds. First it was passed by the wrong legislature. Second – and this was most unconvincing – that the term “morality” does not cover political morality.

I believe that party hopping by an Assemblyman after his election on a party ticket amounts to a fraud on the electorate.

There are three possible ways of taming this turpitude. First, a constitutional amendment to Article 10 by a bi-partisan two-thirds majority should be attempted.

A second way could be for Parliament to enact an ordinary Anti-Defection Law and to enforce it immediately.

If and when the law is challenged on the Nordin Salleh precedent, vigorous arguments could be proffered to invite the Federal Court to overrule its prior, indefensible ruling.

One possible way of expediting the overruling of this bizarre decision is for the King to refer the issue to the Federal Court under Article 130 to seek an advisory opinion on the interpretation of the word “morality” in Article 10(2)(c).

A third way of enacting an anti-defection law would be to promulgate an Emergency Ordinance under Article 150. In the case of Stephen Kalong Ningkan (1968), the Privy Council ruled that “emergency” includes “collapse of civil government”.

Without doubt, defections bring about the collapse of civil government and an Emergency Ordinance would be legally, morally and politically justifiable.

Resignation letters: The legality of the undated resignation letters from the two Pakatan Rakyat defectors is at the heart of the constitutional imbroglio in Perak.

The Speaker of the Perak Assembly accepted the validity of the letters and issued a notice to the Election Commission. In favour of the Speaker’s view, it can be stated that in the UK it is part of the privileges of parliament to determine questions relating to casual vacancies in the House.

The decision of the House is generally regarded as final. Also, Article 35 of the Perak Constitution permits a member of the Assembly to resign “by writing under his hand addressed to the Speaker”.

The problem is that the two hoppers denied that they wrote to the Speaker. There is also a relevant judicial decision. In 1982 the validity of open-dated resignation letters was rejected by the High Court in the Sarawak case of Datuk Ong Kee Hui v Sinyium Mutit.

In the light of this decision and the denial by the two defectors, the Election Commission had some basis to make up its own mind and to declare that the seats had not fallen vacant.

Perhaps the safest thing was to seek a quick Federal Court decision on the interpretation of the Perak Constitution. The Perak Constitution in Articles 63-64 admirably provides for such a course of action. Regrettably, the parties to the dispute and the Sultan did not adopt this course of action.

Dissolution: Under the Federal and state Constitutions, the Sultan has an undoubted discretion, guided by his own wisdom and the broader interest of the state, to refuse a request for premature dissolution. We have examples from Kelantan and Sabah where such requests have been refused.

Confidence of the Assembly: Having been appraised that Pakatan Rakyat had lost the confidence of the Assembly, Tuanku Sultan was faced with many difficult choices. First, he could have prorogued the Assembly pending a court decision on the validity of the hoppers’ resignation letters and the question of vacancies.

Second, he could have asked the antagonists to face the Assembly and prove their support in accordance with usual parliamentary traditions. I am of the view that if an Assembly is in session, or can be quickly brought to session, it is its right to determine the question of confidence and no one should usurp this power nor should factors outside the Assembly be taken into consideration in determining the question of confidence.

Article 16(6) of the Perak Constitution is not crystal clear as to how it is to be determined whether the Mentri Besar has ceased to command the confidence of the majority of the members of the Assembly but there is a 1966 Sarawak judicial decision in Stephen Kalong Ningkan v Tun Abang Hj Openg Tawi Sli that the Governor cannot dismiss a Chief Minister unless he is voted out by the Assembly.

In Perak, however, Tuanku took it upon himself to shoulder the lonely burden of determining who commanded confidence of the assembly. He took pains to interview all four defectors and to hear out the Mentri Besar and Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak more than once.

The Sultan paid heed to the EC decision that there were no vacancies. Undoubtedly he was also influenced by the Speaker’s threat that the Speaker would not allow the defectors to enter the Assembly to participate in the confidence vote.

Dismissal of Mentri Besar: The Constitution of Perak in Article 16(7) states that a member of the Executive Council other than the MB shall hold office at the Sultan’s pleasure. This implies that an MB cannot be dismissed except by a vote of no confidence in the assembly.

The problem is Article 16(6) states that if an MB loses confidence then he has two choices. First, advise dissolution and second, if that request is denied, then resign. There is a lacuna in the law. What if an MB loses the confidence of the Assembly, is denied dissolution, but refuses to step down?

Can the Sultan dismiss him? It is submitted that life is always larger than the law. There are always unchartered territories. If an MB who has lost confidence, and is refused dissolution, is shameless enough not to walk away, then the Sultan would be justified in dismissing him, Article 16(7) notwithstanding.

But in Perak this was not the case. The question of losing confidence was not constitutionally investigated. There are many triable issues and the courts must accept the gauntlet.

Treason: Opinions are being expressed that to defy the Sultan and to threaten to go to court for defence of one’s legal rights amount to treason and a ground for deprivation of citizenship. There are fundamental misunderstandings here.

From day one of Merdeka, the King and the Sultans were open to civil suit for their official actions. They were only immune personally. In 1993 even the personal immunity was taken away.

In sum it is not a violation of the Constitution to resort to the courts to seek an authoritative opinion on one’s rights and duties. Where else does one go, what else does one do, if one has a claim?

Dr Shad Faruqi is Professor of Law at UiTM.

MB: ADUN Lunas akan digugurkan

Sumber:Malaysiakini

kemaskini 6.41pm Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Azizan Abdul Razak akan menghadap Sultan Kedah, Tuanku Abdul Halim Mu'adzam Shah esok untuk memaklumkan permintaan PKR supaya ADUN Lunas, Mohd Radzhi Salleh, yang mengisytiharkan dirinya wakil bebas, digugurkan daripada jawatan exco.

"Atas kuasa Tuanku untuk melantik dan juga menggugurkan mana-mana exco. Saya akan sembahkan permintaan daripada PKR supaya dia digugurkan.

"Kerusi itu kekal kuota PKR kecuali PKR kata berilah pada sesiapa sahaja," kata Azizan.

Bercakap pada sidang akhbar bersama Pengerusi PKR Kedah, Ahmad Kassim di Wisma Darul Aman di Alor Star, Azizan berkata Pakatan Rakyat bersedia menghadapi sebarang kemungkinan akibat tindakan Mohd Radzhi termasuk pilihan raya kecil.

Mohd Radzhi, yang dilantik memegang portfolio exco pelancongan, pembangunan masyarakat dan sumber manusia selepas memenangi pilihan raya umum tahun lepas, mengisytiharkan keluar PKR dan menjadi wakil bebas hari ini atas alasan hilang kepercayaan terhadap kepimpinan parti.

Dalam sidang medianya di Kuala Lumpur hari ini, Mohd Radzhi berkata beliau tidak akan melepaskan jawatan exco.

Sementara itu, Ahmad berkata PKR kesal sikap tidak bertangungjawab Mohd Radzhi yang keluar parti.

"Khabar angin dia hendak melompat telah lama kedengaran tetapi mengapa dia pilih hari ini untuk keluar parti. Ia tidak lain untuk melemahkan PKR dan merendahkan pimpinan PAS Kedah," kata Ahmad.

Ahmad berkata PKR akan meminta Mohd Radzhi meletak jawatan sebagai ADUN Lunas kerana beliau menang bertanding atas tiket parti itu.

Kedah mempunyai lima ADUN dari PKR dan tiga daripadanya termasuk Mohd Radzhi dilantik sebagai anggota exco kerajaan negeri.

PAS mempunyai 16 ADUN dan tujuh daripadanya dilantik sebagai anggota exco kerajaan negeri. BN pula mempunyai 14 ADUN, manakala DAP hanya mempunyai seorang ADUN. BERNAMA

Setelah sekian lama ugut akhirnya Radzhi keluar

Sumber:Malaysia Today

Harakah) - Setelah ugut mengugut sekian lama, akhirnya Adun Lunas, Mohd. Radzhi Salleh mengumumkan dirinya keluar dari PKR dan menjadi Adun bebas.

Menurut sumber, Mohd. Radzhi telah beberapa kali mengugut mahu meninggalkan Pakatan dan menyertai Umno, namun tidak pernah berbuat demikian sebelum ini. Dia juga didakwa beberapa kali berjumpa dengan Datuk Seri Mahzir Khalid bagi membincangkannya.

Kegagalan paling besar Radzhi adalah membawa sebarang pengikut khasnya di kalangan Adun Pakatan Rakyat," kata Zulkifli Yahaya, Pengarah Penerangan kerajaan negeri Kedah.

Sebelum ini, Radzhi telah beberapa kali mengugut untuk meninggalkan PKR. Antaranya disebutkannya kepada Menteri Besar, Datuk Seri Azizan Razak.

Media juga, termasuk TV3, telah beberapa kali menyiarkan berita tentang beberapa kes penyelewengan exco negeri Kedah namun tidak pernah didedahkan nama Exco berkenaan.

Dan exco yang dimaksudkan oleh media sebenarnya adalah Radzhi," kata seorang pemimpin dari Kedah.

Radzhi dilaporkan membuat pengumuman di Kuala Lumpur keputusannya keluar dari PKR namun tidak menyatakan samada dia meletakkan jawatan sebagai Exco kerajaan negeri atau tidak.

Radzhi adalah Ezco Pelancongan Kedah.

Azizan, semasa bercakap di Bukit Mertajam berkata, beliau akan menunggu keputusan dari PKR tentang kedudukan Exco yang dijawat Radzhi kerana ia hak parti itu dalam kerajaan negeri Kedah.

Saya masih menunggu surat rasmi dari PKR mengenai kedudukan Radzhi dan jika pucuk pimpinan parti itu minta saya gantikan orang lain (Anggota Dewan Undangan Negeri dari PKR) maka saya akan ganti dengan orang lain.

Setakat ini, saya cuma mendengar berita mengenai tindakan Radzhi yang keluar parti dan menjadi wakil rakyat bebas tetapi saya belum dimaklumkan oleh beliau sendiri,kata Azizan sebagaimana yang dilaporkan sebuah media.