KENNETH Cheng Chee Kin lays the blame for a stalled confidence motion “squarely at the feet of the reformist Pakatan Harapan (PH) that had promised to restore the dignity of parliament but had achieved very little”. 

“Until there is reform in parliament where confidence motions are given priority and may supersede government business, there is no hope for healthy competition in the house, where the MPs may decide who should govern Malaysia, once and for all,” he writes in the article “Why it is vital to establish legitimacy of the prime minister”.

But confidence motions are matters of convention. According to eminent constitutional expert Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi, although conventions are not law in themselves, they are basically rules of political morality which are regarded as binding.

By convention a no-confidence motion takes precedence. And for several days now, this much supported statement has appeared in almost every media.

By Shad’s definition, convention is a binding rule on political morality. Shad has even said that convention must rule when “the law is gloriously silent” as the case is, for example, when the government dissolves parliament and remains in power during the run-up to the election - the caretaker government.

Now, the Standing Orders too may be silent on no-confidence motions, while invocation of Standing Order (SO) 18(1), which allows the tabling of a motion if it is of urgent public importance, has been dismissed by Dewan Rakyat Speaker Azhar Azizan Harun.

According to Azhar, a motion under SO18(1) is only for discussion purposes and not for voting on  or against any resolution.

With due respect, Azhar is misconceived on SO18(1). It is humbly submitted that SO18 provides for a two-stage process much like, for example, Order 53 Rules of Court 2012 is an application for judicial review.

SO18(1) provides for the first stage: asking for leave “to discuss a defined matter of urgent public importance”. An MP other than a minister is entitled to “rise in his place and ask leave.”

At this stage, the MP is only to explain that the matter is definite, urgent and of public importance. SO18(2) requires the MP to put it in “three hundred words”. He is also required to submit a motion that he proposes to move.

SO18 thus provides for the following:
(a) leave;
(b) explanation; and
(c) motion

Leave allows the speaker to identify and filter out requests which may be trivial or without merit. Consequently, leave will be refused unless the matter is definite, urgent and of public importance.

If leave is allowed, the matter moves to the second stage. The Dewan may be adjourned to a Special Chamber under SO16, constituting all MPs. Importantly, the quorum of the Special Chamber must include the MP who moves the motion – SO16(3).

The Special Chamber may meet at any time during a sitting of the Dewan as determined by the Speaker. SO16(6) states that the Special Chamber shall begin at 2.30pm until 4.30pm or the earlier completion or deferment of business on the Order Paper of the Special Chamber.

Before the Special Chamber now is a motion on a matter that is definite, urgent and of public importance. If it is a no-confidence motion, so be it. The motion has to be dealt with in the manner provided under SO33. Upon the motion being moved and seconded if necessary, the Speaker or the Chair shall propose the question to the Dewan in the same terms as the motion.

Debate may then take place upon that question and may continue so long as any member wishes to speak who is entitled to do so. When no more members wish to speak, the Chair shall put the question to the Dewan for its decision.

So contrary to Azhar’s contention, a motion under SO18 will be put to the vote in accordance with SO45.

One must therefore agree with Puthan Perumal that “a motion of urgency and public importance should be subject to debate and vote”.

Put simply, by convention and the Standing Orders, a no-confidence motion takes precedence - then and now.

So, why blame PH? – October 19, 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.