IN a public lecture at the Institute of Strategic and International Studies Malaysia in June 2020, emeritus professor Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi referred to the Malaysian parliament as the “grand inquest of the nation”.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, “grand” denotes the largest or most important thing of its kind. By “inquest”, the eminent scholar must have intended it to mean a body of people appointed to hold an inquiry, investigation, inquisition or a probe.

It is a grandiose but fitting description.

It is what the Federal Constitution envisages. The highest law of the land has forty-nine Articles of the Constitution (out of a total of 183) to deal with the composition, qualification, legislative powers, financial powers, privileges and procedures of our parliament (Articles 44-68, 73-79 and 96-112).

According to Shad, the Federal Constitution reposes in parliament no less than 11 constitutional functions, two of which are oversight of executive policy and performance to ensure accountability, answerability and responsibility of the political executive to parliament; and control over national finance.

The latter includes oversight of financial policy, examination of the use of financial resources, allocation of the annual budget, and review of the reports of the auditor-general to examine how the allocations were utilised.

The last must mean review by the Dewan Rakyat and the Dewan Negara, and not just parliamentary select committees – in particular, the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).

It is true that Standing Order No. 77 of the Dewan Rakyat provides for the appointment of the PAC for the examination of, among others, “reports of the Auditor-General laid before the House in accordance with Article 107 of the Constitution”.

However, Article 107(1) says that the Auditor General “shall submit his reports to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, who shall cause them to be laid before the House of Representatives.”

Under parliamentary terms, to lay is to formally present to parliament. The purpose of laying a paper or document is to make the information in the document available to the House and to MPs.

What constitutes laying is a matter for the decision of each House. In the United Kingdom, laying is the taking, during the existence of a parliament, of such action as is directed by virtue of any Standing Order or other direction of the House.

Accordingly, the House may so decide that a document laid before it shall be debated.

Article 62(1) allows each House of parliament to regulate its own procedure. Article 63(1) provides the constitutional guarantee that the validity of any proceedings in either House of parliament or any committee thereof shall not be questioned in any court.

Based on the above, there is no reason not to share the reference to parliament as the “Grand Inquest of the Nation”.

The nation can therefore agree with parliament Speaker Tan Sri Johari Abdul’s decision to debate the Auditor-General’s Report 2021 in parliament.

It boggles the mind that a commotion should erupt in the Dewan Rakyat following Perikatan Nasional MPs’ objection to the motion to debate the report and that the opposition should boycott the debate.

Let parliament be the grand inquest of the nation. – June 7, 2023.

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight.