The IGP announced a ban on political ceramah(talk) in Perak as from today till `political situation improve’. Wonder how a ban of ceramah can improve the `political situation’. While the political crisis of having 2 MB in Perak can be confusing in Perak the way to diffuse the political crisis is through opening a State Assembly meeting to establish who command the majority support in the Assembly floor. If there is an issue on the status of the 3 Assemblypersons said to have resigned through their pre-signed resignation letters then a court decision would be sufficient. All these can by done to address the political impasse -so why the ban on ceramah?
One may argue that those steps may not be sufficient to address the political impasse because the voters in the 3 constituencies affected may no longer endorse the elected reps. So: hold a by-election in each of those disputed constituencies.
All these are doable if the EC and the Sultan can cooperate to bring an end to the political impasse which can bring down the government in terms of legitimacy and public confidence.
So: why the ban on ceramahs?
By the sound of it it is a throw back to the repressive eras under Tun M where suppression of the people’s voices was taken as a substitute for political compliance and consensus! It is also a good/bad exampale on how the security apparatus are use/abused to play political roles. The politicians who cannot face the people/voters are to blame!