PANDIKAR Amin Mulia today chided lawmakers who refuse to respect his decision in rejecting motions or questions that could be debated or answered in the Lower House.
The Dewan Rakyat speaker said some lawmakers resorted to challenging him to step down if his rulings were not in their favour.
“In interpreting the standing order, the speaker doesn’t have to give reasons in any Parliament that practices a system like ours.
“In India, it is the right of the speaker to interpret the constitution rules in matters or in relating to the house is concerned, no one including the government can enter into any argument with the speaker over such interpretation,” he told the Dewan Rakyat today.
He said he provided reasons to the lawmakers whose questions were rejected, adding he would review his decisions.
“When I rejected the Alor Star MP’s (Gooi Hsiao Leung) questions, there were two or three MPs who didn’t object, but issued a statement later challenging me to resign.
“I have always reminded members to read Section 23(1)(c) which states questions submitted should not contain any sarcasm or imputation.
“I have the right to reject (the questions) if I think it is sarcastic or contemptible. Meaning, I have the right to read your question from your perspective or mind,” he said.
Standing Order 23(1)(c) requires parliamentary questions to “not contain any argument, interference, opinion, imputation, epithet or misleading, ironical or offensive expression” or to be frivolous or seek information on trivial matters.
Pandikar’s anger was triggered when Charles Santiago (DAP-Klang) stood to question why his motion on Unicef’s study on poverty and malnutrition among children living in low-cost housing in Kuala Lumpur, was rejected.
Pandikar told the MP to sit down and cited sections 41, 42, 43, and 48 of the Dewan Rakyat’s Standing Orders.
“If an MP receives a written ruling by me, and continues to stand to protest, I will not hesitate to take action,” he said.
He said lawmakers who were dissatisfied with his rulings should challenge them by submitting two days written notice.
The three MPs who demanded for Pandikar to resign for dismissing an emergency motion on the seized luxury yacht, owned by businessman Low Taek Jho, and other questions relating to 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) were Nga Kor Ming (DAP-Taiping), Ngeh Koo Ham (DAP-Beruas) and V Sivakumar (DAP-Batu Gajah).
On Tuesday, Pandikar turned down an emergency motion by Gooi, which urged Prime Minister Najib Razak to explain why the government did not intend to claim confiscated luxury yacht Equanimity.
The motion was rejected under section 18(7)(c) of the Standing Orders, which allows the speaker to refuse any motion presented to him if it contravenes the Standing Orders.
Yesterday, Pandikar again rejected two 1MDB-related questions from by Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Gelang Patah) and another four questions by Tony Pua (DAP-Petaling Jaya Utara). – March 8, 2018.
History, propaganda are no bedfellows
Penang Institute wants to draw locals back to lit fest
Honouring the spirit of Malaysia 1963
Umno bukan lagi pemain politik negara, kata penganalisis
Comments
Posted 8 years ago by Leslie Chan · Reply
Posted 8 years ago by Peace Maker · Reply
Posted 8 years ago by Mohanarajan murugeson · Reply
Posted 8 years ago by Bigjoe Lam · Reply
to have absolute discretion... A golden toilet does equate with the THRONE ..
Posted 8 years ago by Ramamurthi ram · Reply