|
|
发表于 16-3-2008 03:20 PM
|
显示全部楼层
回复 7# 网络侠客 的帖子
对！不过宪法在这细节上是空白的，它是出现在国会指令（Orders）里。。。
先看这个报道。。。其他的慢点才回。。。。现在是抹地时间，不敢怠慢，老婆回不爽的。。。
A challenge for Barisan MPs
Sunday, 16 March 2008 08:56am
Datuk Dr Cyrus Das©The Sunday Star (Used by permission)
by Shaila Koshy
With the Government only having a simple majority in the 12th Parliament, will the business of the House be very different?
NO more truancy for Barisan Nasional MPs, that’s for sure. They will have to be diligent about attending debates after the Yang di-Pertuan Agong opens the 12th Parliament or the Executive faces the dire possibility of losing all the motions and Bills it tables.
With only 140 Barisan MPs to 82 Opposition MPs in the Dewan Rakyat, they have no choice.
“I think they’ll be less prone to truancy; if not, we can easily defeat any Bill,” says Lim Kit Siang, the Opposition Leader of the previous Parliament.
This could certainly be the fate of the controversial Special Complaints Commissions Bill – claimed to be a watered down version of the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill proposed by the Royal Commission on the police force – when it is re-introduced.
Most questions in Parliament are decided by a “voice” vote (MPs shout ‘Aye’ or ‘No’) but a Member may challenge the result, under the House’s Standing Order 46(3), and call for a division (where each one is asked how he wants to vote), explains Lim.
And under SO 46(4), the Opposition only has to produce 15 to support the division; so with 82 MPs, neither that nor defeating a Bill is a problem if Barisan MPs go AWOL.
In Malaysia’s bicameral parliament – it is only in the House of Representatives that its 222 members are elected – the results of the 12th general election will barely have an impact on the Dewan Negara.
The 70 senators of the Dewan Negara are elected by each state legislature as well as appointed by the King. Currently, there are only 65 (according to the Senate website, 61 are from Barisan, two from PAS and two from minority groups). With the exception of two whose terms expire next month, most will be gone in the next two years and a few will remain until 2011.
In the Dewan Rakyat, the first change will be in the seating; the Opposition, which filled up one block in the U-shaped sitting arrangement after the 2004 election, will occupy three-and-a-half blocks now.
And in terms of ethnicity/political classification, those in the public gallery will see a clear divide of largely Malay/Sabahan-Sarawakian bumiputra in the government bench and a multi-racial/Malay bumiputra mix in the Opposition half.
Chuckling, Lim notes: “Yes, our side of the House will be more representative of Malaysia’s main ethnic groups.”
As for the tenor, senior Barisan parliamentarian Datuk Seri Utama Dr Rais Yatim says the “perceived and apparent haughtiness of those holding the power could be less.”
“If there is self appraisal, I think gone would be the days of taking things for granted, the highhandedness and rhetoric. I would also look forward to more decorous conduct and less of what I call cockerel behaviour.”
But what of its substance – in terms of passing Bills/ motions, debates, and the composition and work of the parliamentary select committees?
“It can do most of the business. The only thing that it cannot do is amend the Federal Constitution,” says International Islamic University Prof Dr Abdul Aziz Bari.
“But a handful of provisions can be amended by a simple majority. One must remember that some of the provisions need the Rulers' consent and some need the concurrence of the Sabah and Sarawak Yang di-Pertua Negri.”
Constitutional law expert Datuk Dr Cyrus Das says a simple majority in the Dewan Rakyat is usually sufficient for the Government in power, whether at the Federal or state level, to govern.
“Presently, after the 2008 elections, the ruling party at the Federal level has a simple majority as do several state governments whether led by the ruling party or the Opposition.”
Is the denial of a two-third majority more a moral victory for the Opposition more than having any real impact?
Dr Abdul Aziz argues it is more than a moral victory because it underscores the vulnerability of the government.
Quoting Winston Churchill who once said famously “one is enough,” Dr Das recounts that Harold Wilson’s first Labour Government was formed in 1964 with an overall majority of four in a 630-seat House of Commons.
“However, there is a fixation over a two-third majority here which seems largely psychological with traces of political vanity.
“Such a majority is only needed legally for amending the Federal Constitution under Article 159(3),” he says, adding that there are equivalent provisions in the State Constitutions.
Dr Das says that requirement is a safeguard to the people that the Constitution will not be freely and easily tinkered with in Parliament.
“It is especially important in countries whose Judiciary has not recognised the doctrine of implied restraints on the amending power of Parliament.”
Citing the German Constitutional Court, the Indian Supreme Court and the Supreme Courts of Bangladesh and Pakistan as those that recognise the doctrine that Parliament cannot alter the basic structure of the Constitution, Dr Das says the Malaysian Judiciary has not recognised this doctrine.
The safeguard of a weighted majority is therefore that much more important in Malaysia and especially so, he adds, since the Constitution reflects a social contract made between the multi-racial people of Malaya at the time of independence.
“A constitutional obstacle should be seen as a strict no to a proposed measure and not something that could be bypassed because the ruling party has a two-third majority.
“Take for example the amendment to Article 121 in 1988 to remove ‘judicial power’: it created an anomaly and begs the question, what power do the courts exercise because the Constitution continues to recognise the legislative power in Parliament (Article 66(1)) and the executive power in the Executive (Article 80)?
“The absence of a two-third majority by any single party means the Constitution remains intact and cannot be amended by this Parliament, unless there is cross party support for an amendment measure.”
Asked what constitutional amendment he thought the Opposition would support, Dr Rais, who first served as an MP in 1974, says: “I don’t see any obstacle if the amendment was not self-serving to the Executive but was for the general good of the people, for example, one that allowed for a strong Judiciary.”
“I would look forward to one on the powers of the Federal Court – on the rights of individuals in inter-religious conflicts, it is the Federal Court that is the court of final call.”
One constitutional amendment that would certainly not get through now is that tabled last December extending the retirement age of the Election Commission chairman, says Dr Abdul Aziz.
Others of course are ouster clauses usurping judicial power and the draconian or prohibitive provisions in the Internal Security Act, Official Secrets Act and Printing Presses and Publications Act, adds Lim.
As for parliamentary committees, Lim says they should now have greater Opposition representation and should not be headed by members of the Executive.
He hopes the committees work “full-throttle” to scrutinise Executive policies and actions for accountability and transparency.
What can Malaysians hope from 142 Barisan MPs and 82 Opposition MPs – a face-off or cooperation?
“We may see a Parliament that scrutinises each and every policy and action taken by the Government, bringing about a better parliament, one that is envisaged by the Constitution, and a responsible Government,” says Dr Abdul Aziz, adding that the proceedings would certainly be livelier.
One thing that would be high on the rakyat's priority would be more time given to the debating of Bills, especially those important to marginalised groups.
In the last three days of the Dewan Rakyat last year, 10 Bills were passed including the Persons With Disabilities Bill, the Prisons (Amendment) Bill and International Trade in Endangered Species Bill, with barely three hours spent on debating the new law for the disabled!
The Prime Minister could level the playing field unwittingly with his new Cabinet; if greater numbers hold Executive positions, the number of backbenchers debating and asking questions will be reduced drastically.
Dr Rais expects to hear a higher quality of debate and the addressing of issues on a more intellectual level.
“This will be a challenge for Barisan MPs; in the last Parliament, several Opposition MPs were already supporting their debate points with data and sound reasoning.”
On whether Barisan MPs would be more willing to vote their conscience now, Dr Rais, who was out of Parliament from 1990 to 1998 when he was with the now defunct Semangat 46, replies in the negative.
“The practice of being beholden to the Whip is too ingrained. I don’t expect anything so drastic. But if the debates could centre on matters common to all Malaysians, that would not be an issue.” |
|
本周最热论坛帖子
变色卡
千斤顶
楼主
这意味着，倘若在野党议员勤于出席下议院，在国阵议员出席率偏低的情况下，就有可能通过废除这个允许未经审讯而无限期扣留的恶法。他补充，非政府组织与人民应该监督82名在野党议员，确保他们遵守纪律出席国会，争取在时机出现时，一举废除这些备受争议的法令。
在问答时段，政治与经济评论人何启斌向主讲人提问“国阵是否已死？”，邱继平认为，“国阵的死亡”并无法带来利益，“国阵的改革”才能惠及全民。较早前，马列英迪斯（左图）也建议，非政府组织应该助“在野的国阵”一臂之力，让他们学习扮演在野党的角色，在州议会中制衡当权者，为国家两线政治铺路。
过去对回教党批判甚严的法立诺（右图），在回答“马来西亚会否朝向回教国方向发展”的问题时提醒，巫统才是“回教化”以及滥用新经济政策的始作俑者，因为巫统假设以“马来人”与“回教”的论述就能满足马来选民。他说，而登嘉楼、吉兰丹的选绩趋势证明，马来人并不满足于建造回教堂，或文明化回教（Islam Hadhari）的工程计划，他们要的是实质的发展。
再农阿末（左图）透露，主流报章接获指示，低调处理去年11月10日干净与公平选举联盟（Bersih，简称净选盟）发动的大型集会，因此该报只是刊登一图、为数十段的报道。后来政府在主流媒体主管面前否认发出相关指示，然后“假装”捉一个官员来训话。接下来的兴都权利行动力量（Hindraf）发起的大集会，他们刊登三张照片，结果同样被训话。
）还有一个数据为什么否决2/3那么重要，马来西亚独立50年，修改了600+次宪法；美国独立了差不多200年，修改了50次，而且有些是越修改越尊重人权，像right to silence就是一个很好的例子~
发表于 23-3-2008 08:16 PM
2936 
115
