Takiyuddin’s ordinance bombshell


DURING the Dewan Rakyat sitting yesterday, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Law and Parliament) Takiyuddin Hassan dropped a bombshell that all six ordinances made pursuant to the Proclamation of Emergency had been revoked, with effect from July 21, 2021.

The ordinances

Even if the ordinances have been revoked, constitutionally, they still have to be laid before Parliament pursuant to Article 150(3) of the federal constitution:

“A Proclamation of Emergency and any ordinance promulgated under Clause (2B) shall be laid before both Houses of Parliament and, if not sooner revoked, shall cease to have effect if resolutions are passed by both houses annulling such proclamation or ordinance, but without prejudice to anything previously done by virtue thereof or to the power of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong to issue a new proclamation under Clause (1) or promulgate any ordinance under Clause (2B).”

The use of the word “shall” in Article 150(3) denotes a mandatory requirement.

The only effect of the revocation is that the ordinances will cease to have effect and any resolutions to annul them would be redundant/academic as they no longer have effect.

However, at the time of writing, checks on the federal government gazette website reveal that no such revocation order has been gazetted.

In the event there is/exists a revocation order but it has not been gazetted, the revocation order would not have the force of law.

Assuming it is true that there is a revocation order and it has been gazetted, it is unclear whether:

  • the ordinances have been revoked as Takiyuddin specified or
  • the date of the revocation order or the date it was gazetted is July 21, but the revocation is to take effect before/on/after August 1, 2021.

You can only be sure after examining the wording of the revocation order.

Additionally, the “revocation” of the ordinances (without prior notice via publication in the federal gazette) could result in scenarios whereby individuals are fined/charged between July 21 and August 1 for “offences” created pursuant to the ordinances when no such “offence” exists.

An example would the offence of “creating, offering, publishing, etc., fake news or publication containing fake news,” which came about as a result of Section 4 of the Emergency (Essential Powers) (No. 2) Ordinance 2021.

The proclamation

The issue is whether the Proclamation of Emergency, issued on January 11, 2021, has been revoked.

If it has not, and even if it were true that the ordinances have been revoked, the proclamation would still have to be laid before Parliament and MPs can introduce a resolution for its annulment.

The opposition, through Anwar Ibrahim and Ngeh Koo Ham, have in fact done so.

Their resolution for the annulment of the proclamation should be given priority, and be debated and voted upon.

However, an inspection of the Dewan Rakyat’s calendar for the present parliamentary sitting reveals that the special sitting is held for ministers to provide explanations to MPs about the national recovery plan.

There appears to be no room for the tabling, debate, and voting of a resolution to annul the proclamation.

If the proclamation has been revoked, then Malaysia is no longer in a state of emergency and the emergency came to an end on the date of the revocation order (or the date stipulated therein).

Notwithstanding this, pursuant to Article 150(3) of the federal constitution, the proclamation would still have to be laid before Parliament. – July 27, 2021.

* Joshua Wu 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.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments