IN Malaysia, the government is based on the Westminster system, which is founded on the British Westminster model of responsible government, which comprises of three branches:

• the legislature: Parliament, which makes the law
• the executive: the prime minister, ministers, departments and agencies, which implement the law
• the judiciary: the courts, which interpret and apply the law.

At the heart of the system is the concept of the separation of powers between the three branches of government.

It is nonetheless a core convention that the executive, commonly referred to as the government, must be able to command and retain the confidence of Parliament. It is a principle that determines the relationship between the two branches of government – Parliament and executive. 

It is also fundamental to the system of Parliamentary democracy which Malaysia adopts.

The principle is echoed in the UK’s Cabinet Manual which states that “the ability of a government to command the confidence of the elected House… is central to its authority to govern. It is tested by votes on motions of confidence, or no confidence.” 

Votes of confidence or no-confidence are therefore an important, if not the most important, parliamentary procedural device to determine the fate of a Westminster model government, which in turn is ultimately dependent on the support of a majority of MPs. 

Which is why a debate on a confidence motion will generally take precedence over the normal business for that day. The authoritative constitutional text Griffith & Ryle on Parliament states that by convention, if a motion of no confidence is tabled, the government provides time for it to be debated.

Another authoritative text, Parliamentary Practice, similarly states that by established convention the government always accedes to the demand to allot a day for the discussion of a no confidence motion. 

In allotting a day for this purpose, the government is entitled to have regard to the exigencies of its own business – as may be found in the Dewan Rakyat Standing Order 15 – but a reasonably early day is invariably found. This convention is founded on the legitimacy of such a motion.  

For its part, the government has everything to gain by meeting such a direct challenge to its authority at the earliest possible moment. 

In Malaysia, the Dewan Rakyat speaker will have the discretion to decide which item should go first on the parliamentary Order Paper. But based on the above, the motion of no-confidence should take precedence despite Standing Order 15 giving precedence to government business.

As a former judge, he should be keen to uphold a core convention of a Westminster model government and parliamentary democracy. – May 10, 2020.

* Hafiz Hassan reads The Malaysian Insight.

* This is the opinion of the writer or publication and does not necessarily represent the views of The Malaysian Insight. Article may be edited for brevity and clarity.