AFTER nearly 10 months as Dewan Rakyat speaker, Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof said improving order in the house remains a work in progress as it involves changing an entrenched political culture, which puts party above national interests.

Parliament proceedings can be lively but ceramah issues should be kept out of the august house, Ariff told The Malaysian Insight.

“If they want to talk about ceramah issues, they can do it outside till kingdom come. But when you’re in the house, you have to behave with decorum, using the Standing Orders.”

The 69-year-old former Court of Appeal judge, appointed speaker last July, said Malaysian MPs could be “recalcitrant” and did not always listen to the speaker or his instructions.

This was unparliamentary behaviour which showed the difference between Malaysian and UK lawmakers, he said.

Such embarrassing behaviour was on display when the Singapore speaker visited recently, leaving Ariff disappointed.

The shouting match arose after Noh Omar (Tanjong Karang-BN) refused to leave the Dewan Rakyat despite being barred by Deputy Speaker Nga Kor Ming for saying that the latter was “unfit” for the post.

In the subsequent session, Ariff had to call a recess of 15 minutes to ensure Noh left the house.

Ariff said it was disappointing to see the seasoned MP appeal to the visiting Singapore Speaker Tan Chuan Jin after the ruling was upheld.

“You can’t say things like ‘the Singapore speaker is here. Let’s ask him what he thinks’. This is not good.”

Ariff, however, has praise for younger MPs whom he said substantiated their debates with facts and figures.

He also believes in freeing MPs to discuss issues of national interests and this was the reason he lifted the ban on debating 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) until the case went to trial.

But there will always be some topics that are off-limits in Parliament, he said, with each country having its own limitations.

He also has to weigh whether there is value discussing certain issues, for example, racial issues, as one topic like that could “undo all the good work we are trying to do”.

His appeal to MPs across the political divide is to keep politics outside the house and for both sides to listen to one another, as both have contributions to bring to the table.

Excerpts of the interview:

TMI: Does your experience as a former judge help maintain order in Parliament?

Ariff: With my training as a judge, I know I have to be neutral and maintain some decorum whenever I can. Beyond that, it’s just management and I try not to be too legal although there’s a lot of law. 

But most of the time it’s about management and being a catalyst for reform. 

TMI: Why did you lift the ban on debating 1MDB in Parliament?

Ariff: The matter (1MDB issue) was raised on the floor and I had to give a ruling. It was a ruling waiting to be made. The previous ruling was not correct. 

Parliament is a place to discuss issues of national importance. What more when it’s discussed all over the world but in Malaysia it can’t be discussed for being allegedly sub judice.

It’s only sub judice if the matter is being tried in the domestic courts. We don’t discuss 1MDB in Parliament now because it’s in the domestic courts. 

The point had to be made that Parliament must be given the utmost freedom to discuss and debate. That’s why I had to run a long judgment on this.

TMI: Are there still taboo topics in Parliament?

Ariff: Each country has its own limitations. You can’t criticise the queen in the UK House of Commons. Seditious matters should not be discussed. Just as you can’t debate the character of a ruler unless there’s a substantive motion.

You can’t even discuss the conduct of a foreign sovereign of a friendly country. Those are the legal requirements and it doesn’t impede free speech. There are reasons for this.

TMI: Will there be a time when Parliament can debate anything?

Ariff: I don’t have a crystal ball but we try to control the temperature a bit. Racial issues can undo all the good work we are trying to do. It doesn’t take much for someone to poke a racial issue and things will get very disorderly.

You can’t call someone a communist, even as a joke.

You can’t call someone a racist either as it cuts both ways. We don’t need all this stuff to be raised in Parliament because it is a forum for people to speak for national interests. 

Parliament is not a debating society. Nor is it a grand ceramah. You have to speak on behalf of your constituents and for national interests. 

That’s why in the UK, the opposition is seen as her majesty’s loyal opposition. The loyalty is to the nation not so much as the sovereign as it’s mostly ceremonial and symbolic. But MPs should be loyal to national interests. So, the ceramah stuff should be kept out of Parliament.

TMI: What do you think of the MPs after three sessions?

Ariff: I have great respect for the greater majority of the MPs, particularly the younger set. They are smart, they do their homework and they debate well with facts and figures.

Generally, Parliament has shown great improvement after disregarding some of the excesses. It’s bound to happen in the interim as it’s all about culture. You can’t change a person’s perception of what Parliament is within a few months.

The quality of Malay has rocketed and the public is generally impressed. When people downplay or poke fun of the younger MPs, I protect them. They may be young but they are able to hold their ground. They are the future leaders of tomorrow.

TMI: What’s your advice to MPs?

Ariff: I would implore them to keep the ceramah issues outside. If they wanna talk about ceramah issues, they can do it outside till kingdom come. But when you’re in the house, you have to behave with decorum, using the Standing Orders.

That has to be the way forward. You can’t have people ignoring the Standing Orders. You can’t have five MPs standing up and refusing to sit. That’s not parliamentary behaviour. This is the difference between UK and Malaysia.

They make a lot of noise in the House of Commons, but when the speaker says “Order, order, order”, they sit down. Here, when you point to them and cite the SO, they still refuse to sit down.

It’s like more encouragement to be recalcitrant. It’s not good for Parliament. And when there are foreigners like the Singapore speaker, they still show their bad side.

You can’t say things like “The Singapore speaker is here. Let’s ask him what he thinks” etc. This is not good. I am not saying they can’t be rough or noisy as that adds to the drama of Parliament as the public wants to see it. 

If you telecast the committees, nobody would want to watch as committee proceedings are very boring. The lively aspect of Parliament is in the debates. That’s ok but they must listen to the chair.

The speaker is there to keep decorum, ensure everyone has a say and provide some oversight of the executive function. 

TMI: What are your thoughts about your deputies also being politicians?

Ariff: It’s the same in UK but of course there’s parliamentary culture. They must forget their party affiliation when they are chairing and things will be better. 

It’s different for me because I have given up all party positions, high and low. So, I have no worries. I don’t even attend party conventions so that I’m seen as impartial. 

My deputies are MPs and party leaders and hence their considerations are slightly different. 

TMI: What do you think about the Nga-Noh Omar spat?

Ariff: The politics outside the house will be politics. I’m not sure what was really said as both parties have their say. But for me, that’s a ceramah issue. Even if he had said it outside the house, it should not be brought back to Parliament as it was a ceramah issue. 

The argument applies both ways. 

That’s the only way to lower the temperature and politicking in the house. You can’t take away the politicking in the house as people will be supporting their own parties. But you have to be moderate about it.

You can’t call one side a racist party all the time and as the other side will call you communist and it will go haywire. You don’t have to win at all costs. That’s not the way.

If you want to be very political, you will only think along a straight line. There are many good points raised by the opposition as they have been ministers before. Many things they say can be appreciated by the government side, too. 

And just because you were previously a minister, it doesn’t mean you can’t listen to the new ministers. If people are more tolerant and adopt a more positive attitude to parliamentary democracy you will get good behaviour. – April 30, 2019.