ALAS, Parliament will convene for a special sitting, as announced by the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) in a statement issued yesterday.

The PMO statement said that the special sitting is to “explain” the national recovery plan (NRP) to the MPs and amend the laws and regulations to allow for hybrid proceedings to be held. 

The Dewan Rakyat will sit for five days from July 26 to July 29 and August 2, while the Dewan Negara will sit for three days from August 3 to August 5.

The sitting will be the third Special Meeting of Parliament in recent years.

Previously, two Special Meetings were called by the then prime minister Najib Razak under Standing Order 11(3). The first Special Meeting was about the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 plane crash in 2014. The second Special Meeting, which was called in 2016, was over Malaysia’s participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

Now, it will be interesting to see how the Order Paper for the special sitting will be presented, especially when the proclamation of Emergency and Emergency ordinances have to be laid before the Dewan Rakyat, as mandated by Article 150(3) of the Federal Constitution.

There are seven Emergency ordinances, namely (in order of promulgation):

•    Emergency (Essential Powers) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (Prevention and Control of Infectious Diseases) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (Employees’ Minimum Standards of Housing, Accommodations and Amenities) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (Essential Powers) (No. 2) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (Essential Powers) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (Offenders Compulsory Attendance) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021

•    Emergency (National Trust Fund) (Amendment) Ordinance 2021

So, there is a lot on the plate – so to speak.

Will five days be sufficient? Najib allocated two days for the Dewan Rakyat to debate the TPPA alone.

Can the NRP be explained without a debate in the Dewan Rakyat?

It can be argued that based on the 1979 case of Inspector-General of Police & Anor v Lee Kim Hoong, the requirement that Emergency ordinances “shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament” is not only mandatory, but the effect of non-compliance is that the Emergency ordinance will cease to have effect after Parliament has convened. This was the decision of the High Court judge in the case, Justice Harun.

On appeal, the Federal Court upheld the decision by Justice Harun and found that it is mandatory for any ordinance promulgated under Article 150(2B) to be laid before both Houses of Parliament. This affirms that the effect of non-compliance is that the Emergency ordinance will cease to have the force of law.  

Therefore, one has to read Article 150(7) of the Federal Consitution with Justice Harun’s decision. Article 150(7) allows Emergency ordinances to remain in force for six months after a proclamation of Emergency ceases to be in force.

The above is supported by parliamentary practice. When the 13th Parliament was convened in 1971, 21 months after the 1969 proclamation of Emergency, the provisions in some of the Emergency ordinances that were promulgated during the Emergency rule, were presented to the Dewan Rakyat in a Bill of Parliament.

In other words, if the emergency laws as provided in the ordinances were to continue to have the force of law, they will have to be laid in a Bill and be subject to the full legislative process: First Reading, Second Reading and Third Reading.

It is not law passed by Parliament if Parliament does not exercise its legislative power as mandated by Article 66 (on Legislative Procedure) as well as in accordance with the Standing Orders (No. 48, 53 and 61 on First, Second and Third Readings respectively).

The government may not put its NRP to a debate in Parliament, but there is no turning away from parliamentary debates on the Emergency ordinances.

It is therefore understandable that MPs are venting their fury at the government convening the Dewan Rakyat for five days only.

Given that the Emergency ordinances have to be laid or tabled anew as Bills of Parliament, is five days sufficient? – July 6, 2021.

* 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.