GUAN ENG SHOULD ADMONISH HIS FATHER FOR DAP DERESIGRATION FUSS

It is Guan Eng’s daddy Lim Kit Siang, who started to open his mouth in Gelang Patah and babbled that DAP would be revoked by the ROS in no time and shamelessly pointed his finger that it is a dirty tactic attempted by UMNO / BN. That’s exactly what happened if Guan Eng is afraid to tell us all.

Hence, his daddy’s wild accusations ought to be challenged and redressed by PM’s aide Datuk Seri Tengku Sariffuddin Tengku Ahmad. Datuk Tengku was just reminding DAP members that should DAP is banned from using their logo in the coming general election, it is due to their own members’ complaints lodged to ROS. So how is UMNO linked to DAP’s CEC gerrymandering?

DAP leaders claimed that the matter is cleared in court in 2014 when they have agreed to conduct another re-election upon RoS demands. Yet, as clarified by Home Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi in parliament in 2016, RoS found contradictions in the re-election content and the veracity of the documents submitted.

After the re-election, there were claims by some party members that they were denied the right to attend the party congress as delegates.

An important issue that DAP needs to take note and in particular Gobind who tried to dispute Datuk Tengku’s statement, should DAP is convinced that their re-election is recognised, hence their CEC is legal, why would Guan Eng request to meet the Home Minister to hold a closed meeting in the first instance?

Yes, Datuk Tengku has every right to answer and defend every wild and unfounded allegation from anyone and in particular the opposition block as he is one of the chief staff to the Prime Minister. As the government appointed officer, he is carrying his duties and responsibilites to maintain the image and sovereignty of the country in which the Prime Minister is the Head of our nation and elected in a democratic process.

Should DAP or anyone questioned Datuk Tengku’s capacity as the government officials, apparently they are not just anti-establishment but they are those who are sabotaging the country.

Further, is there a need for Kit Siang to tour around the country to gather feedback if he should resign from politics? Instead, why didn’t Kit Siang take this opportunity to explain the reasons behind his own members” protests even after the CEC re-election? Kit Siang’s intention is clear, he needed badly to cover-up his hidden hands in the gerrymandered CEC election and re-election that now calling for sympathy.

Kit Siang and Guan Eng are those who should be held fully responsible if DAP is revoked. That is the actual warning to DAP members. Therefore, DAP members should not buy their crocodile tears. Full Stop!

Let us have a look at the chronology of the DAP CEC elections debacle:

15/12/2012: DAP held its 16th National Congress central executive committee (CEC) elections. After the election, many had expressed their dissatisfaction for not having a single Malay candidate elected into the CEC.

3/1/2012: The DAP’s CEC had been accused of a ‘technical glitch’ in its calculations by some party delegates during the party elections at the 16th DAP National Congress which was held on December 15, 2012.

5/1/2012: DAP admitted its fault saying the error occurred in the preparation of a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet on its re-calculation which pushed (now elected DAP Bukit Bendera MP) Zairil Khir Johari to the 20th position after securing 803 votes from the initial 305 votes.

9/1/2013: Disgruntled DAP members called for the party to hold fresh polls as a need to restore its integrity and public confidence in DAP.

18/4/2013: The Registrar of Societies (RoS) issued a statement saying it did not recognise the party’s CEC due to the dispute surrounding the party elections and may face deregistration should it fail to take steps to resolve the matter within a month.

18/4/2013: DAP secretary-general Lim Guan Eng called for a press conference on the same day and gave RoS until 3 pm the following day to revoke the ‘letter’, failing which it would use Pas and Parti Keadilan Rakyat (PKR) banners to contest in the May 5 general election.

18/4/2013: The Election Commission said DAP can still field its candidates to contest in the election despite the CEC not being recognised by the RoS.
19/4/2013: DAP chairman Chow Kon Yeow said the party would contest under Pas and PKR banners during the election.

12/7/2013: A booklet titled “The Equity Report” over alleged fraud in the CEC election surfaced, written by one, Father Augustus Chen.

25/7/2013: Perak DAP secretary Nga Kor Ming denied claims that the DAP CEC was fraudulent and blamed Barisan Nasional for a creating a ‘smear campaign’ and called the author of the book a coward.

31/7/2013: Lim Guan Eng rejected RoS’ directive to hold a re-election, claiming that the party leadership was unhappy with the decision.

4/8/2013: RoS director-general Datuk Abdul Rahman Othman again urged the DAP to hold fresh elections as its party grassroots demanded so.

12/8/2013: DAP held an emergency meeting in Kuala Lumpur to discuss the directive by RoS for it to hold fresh elections. Lim Guan Eng said it will come up with an action plan over a letter by RoS dated August 7.

15/8/2013: DAP decided to hold re-election in which party chairman Karpal Singh said it will hold a new set of elections to avoid being deregistered by RoS, although the party felt the directive by RoS, does not have sanctity or authority of law.

10/9/2013: Ladang Paroi DAP branch chief David Dass applied for an injunction to stop the special congress scheduled for Sept 29 on grounds that it was illegal to call for a special congress to hold CEC polls.

Dass had argued that the party’s constitution stated a national congress where a minimum 10-week notice is required. For a Special Congress, a mere seven-day notice to delegates is sufficient. DAP had filed a counter suit to strike out the application.

27/9/2013: The Kuala Lumpur High Court dismissed Dass’s application for an injunction, and ruled in favor of DAP. “The court has no jurisdiction in accordance with section 18 (c) of Societies Act 1966. It is up to Registrar of Societies (RoS) to decide whether DAP has complied its directive,” said the High Court judge Rosnaini Saub.