'Speaker erred in dismissing demands to debate flood issue'
Dewan Rakyat Speaker Azhar Azizan Harun had erred in dismissing the demands from MPs to debate the recent floods during the parliamentary proceedings on Monday, lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla declared.
Azhar had cited Order 18 of the Dewan Rakyat’s Standing Orders to back his decision, which stipulates that MPs must give written notice at least 24 hours before bringing an urgent motion for discussion.
However, Haniff argued that given the urgency of the matter, the speaker (above) has discretion under Order 100 to set aside the 24-hour notice requirement.
This is especially since the only item on the Parliament’s agenda that day – the second reading of proposed amendments to the Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases Act 1988 (Act 342) – had been postponed at around 11.30am that day pending further refinements to the draft amendment bill.
“There was still the remainder of the morning session and the entirety of the evening session remaining for the sitting on Dec 20, giving nearly four hours to allow the issue of major floods to be debated, without interfering in any of the Dewan Rakyat’s meeting agenda that had already been finished,” Haniff said in a statement issued today.
Order 100 reads: “All matters not specifically provided in these orders and all questions relating to the detailed working of these orders shall be regulated in such manner, not inconsistent with these orders, as (the speaker) may from time to time direct.”
Lawyer Haniff Khatri Abdulla
Echoing Haniff, Sepang MP Mohamed Hanipa Maidin said Azhar had become “too literalist” in interpreting the standing orders.
“There are a thousand reasons to allow the debate and a thousand excuses to deny it. Pick and choose!
“Since when an oral motion is not allowed in urgent situations? Even in court, under special circumstances, oral motions are tolerated,” said Hanipa, a former deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Legal Affairs).
The recent floods occurred when Tropical Depression 29W made landfall near Kuantan on Dec 17, bringing with it torrential rain and heavy flooding across central Peninsular Malaysia over the weekend.
Pahang and Selangor were among the worst-hit states.
On Dec 20, the Dewan Rakyat held an extra day of sitting to debate the amendments to Act 342, which controversially increased penalties against violations of Covid-19 standard operation procedures.
Debate postponed at the eleventh hour
However, the debate was postponed at the eleventh hour to allow more time to reach bipartisan consensus on amendments to the bill.
It was reported that, before the postponement, several MPs on both sides of the political divide had attempted to raise issues about the floods in the peninsula and the ongoing rescue and relief efforts.
However, Azhar had refused to budge, reportedly saying that there was another matter scheduled for debate.
Azhar also pointed out that according to the standing orders, a minister would have to take the initiative to provide an explanation on the matter and give notice to the speaker.
“I don’t have the power to allow the jump from one issue to another,” news portal The Vibes quoted the speaker as saying.
In a Bernama report released yesterday, Azhar defended his stance and denied allegations on social media that he had rejected an urgent motion under Order 18(1) to debate the issue.
On the contrary, he said, no one had submitted any notice for such a motion.
“Regarding the flood situation, MPs can send a notice to me, via WhatsApp and so on, before the sitting (Dec 20). In fact, a written motion can be submitted on the morning of Dec 20.
“However, no one did that,” he was quoted as saying.
Submitting such motions would enable him to facilitate debates in the Dewan Rakyat so that the relevant ministers could respond to questions, and enable them to make preparations to answer matters raised during the debate, Azhar added.
Echoing Haniff, Sepang MP Mohamed Hanipa Maidin said Azhar had become “too literalist” in interpreting the standing orders.
“There are a thousand reasons to allow the debate and a thousand excuses to deny it. Pick and choose!
“Since when an oral motion is not allowed in urgent situations? Even in court, under special circumstances, oral motions are tolerated,” said Hanipa, a former deputy minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Legal Affairs).
The recent floods occurred when Tropical Depression 29W made landfall near Kuantan on Dec 17, bringing with it torrential rain and heavy flooding across central Peninsular Malaysia over the weekend.
Pahang and Selangor were among the worst-hit states.
On Dec 20, the Dewan Rakyat held an extra day of sitting to debate the amendments to Act 342, which controversially increased penalties against violations of Covid-19 standard operation procedures.
Debate postponed at the eleventh hour
However, the debate was postponed at the eleventh hour to allow more time to reach bipartisan consensus on amendments to the bill.
It was reported that, before the postponement, several MPs on both sides of the political divide had attempted to raise issues about the floods in the peninsula and the ongoing rescue and relief efforts.
However, Azhar had refused to budge, reportedly saying that there was another matter scheduled for debate.
Azhar also pointed out that according to the standing orders, a minister would have to take the initiative to provide an explanation on the matter and give notice to the speaker.
“I don’t have the power to allow the jump from one issue to another,” news portal The Vibes quoted the speaker as saying.
In a Bernama report released yesterday, Azhar defended his stance and denied allegations on social media that he had rejected an urgent motion under Order 18(1) to debate the issue.
On the contrary, he said, no one had submitted any notice for such a motion.
“Regarding the flood situation, MPs can send a notice to me, via WhatsApp and so on, before the sitting (Dec 20). In fact, a written motion can be submitted on the morning of Dec 20.
“However, no one did that,” he was quoted as saying.
Submitting such motions would enable him to facilitate debates in the Dewan Rakyat so that the relevant ministers could respond to questions, and enable them to make preparations to answer matters raised during the debate, Azhar added.
This soiled tansri would be erred in its job if it didn't clamp the issue down.
ReplyDeleteIts master demands it!