KUALA LUMPUR – Datuk Mohd Rashid Hasnon is only exercising his right as deputy speaker of the Dewan Rakyat if he rejects motions filed by MPs to unseat Speaker Datuk Azhar Azizan Harun, said experts.
Constitutional expert Prof Emeritus Datuk Shad Saleem Faruqi is of the view that it is proper for Azhar to recuse himself on the issue and let his deputy handle the matter.
“Under principles of natural justice, the speaker cannot be a judge in his own cause.
“The speaker having disqualified himself, one of his deputies had to handle the matter. Are the deputies, too, disqualified? I don’t think so.
“Someone has to handle the matter and, in the absence of the speaker, the deputies act on his behalf under Article 57(3) of the federal constitution,” Shad Saleem told The Vibes.
Among motions rejected were those raised by Lembah Pantai MP Fahmi Fadzil and Pulai MP Datuk Seri Salahuddin Ayub.
The application filed by Fahmi citing Standing Order 4(3) and Article 57(2)(c) seeks to put forth a motion to remove Azhar from his seat.
A letter signed by Rashid stated Fahmi’s motion was not done in proper order as it failed to comply with Standing Orders 4(3) and 27 of the Dewan Rakyat rules.
Like Fahmi, Salahuddin’s motion was also met with the same response by Rashid.
In a letter, the deputy speaker rejected Salahuddin’s motion because it was not in accordance with Standing Order 4(1) and the correct legal provisions.
Universiti Islam Antarabangsa Malaysia legal expert Prof Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmood is of the view that Rashid is well within his rights to reject the motions based on technicalities.
The rejection (of Fahmi’s motion) seems proper because the deputy speaker referred to Standing Order 27 that such motion must be preceded with a notice to the Dewan Rakyat secretary.
“According to the constitution, Article 57 deals with the election and the removal of speaker and deputy speaker, while Standing Order 4(3) only deals with election of speaker,” Nik Ahmad Kamal said.
Alternatively, Nik Ahmad Kamal said Fahmi and other MPs whose motions have been rejected can appeal or challenge the rejection when Parliament reconvenes.
“Standing Order 4(3) states the decision of the speaker/chairman is final but may be challenged by a substantive motion. Fahmi may still challenge it in Parliament,” he said.
Meanwhile, advocate and solicitor Andrew Khoo also shared the same sentiments, saying it appears the PKR lawmaker did not comply with the proper Standing Order when writing his application.
“Standing Order 4(3) deals with the nomination of a person for the position of speaker. Did Fahmi propose someone?
“If not, the proposed motion would not have been in conformity with Standing Order 4(3). This Standing Order is not about proposing that a person resigns from the position of speaker.
“I believe there is room for the speaker/deputy speaker to exercise a degree of discretion, but it depends on the specific Standing Order,” Khoo told The Vibes.
Proper observance of Westminster system
Parliamentary affairs observer and researcher Ong Ooi Heng said lawmakers, especially from the opposition bloc, must know the Dewan Rakyat Standing Orders like the back of their hands as well as have enough understanding of federal constitution matters pertaining to the conduct in Parliament.
“For instance, the motion came from government MPs or one of its ministers, but there was an error.
“I would assume the speaker’s office or secretary’s office will communicate with the minister in charge of Parliament to make edits and perfect it. And then, they will approve the motion.
“Therefore, if opposition MPs wish to submit such motions, they have to understand the whole conduct and procedure of the Westminster system,” Ong said.
Ong listed the steps on how the motion should have been submitted as follows:
1. MPs are required to prepare letters of notification and motion, and submit them at least 14 days before Parliament meets. They will first write to the Secretary (Setiausaha), citing Standing Order 27, to inform the House that they will submit such a motion.
2. At the same time, the lawmakers will prepare another document citing the Article 57 (2)(c) of the federal constitution.
3. In the same document, they will cite Standing Order 4, which stipulates the procedure of the election of the speaker. The applicants will then state the name of the proposer, seconder and candidate for the position. The same document should also state whether the said proposed candidate is willing to serve if elected.
4. If the motion is approved and brought to the House for debate, it will be voted on.
5. When the MPs manage to remove the speaker from his post, the lawmakers will have to immediately decide on the new speaker. This is because Standing Order 3 stipulates that, whenever there is a vacancy in the office of the speaker, as soon as a quorum is present, it must proceed to elect a speaker. – The Vibes, September 4, 2021
