Tag Archives: no confidence vote

The solution? A confidence vote without the MoU

Uncategorized,

It should surprise no one that the unity government from day one has been faced with the threat of its removal. In fact, it should be welcomed for the simple reason that it is an unconstitutional government because its appointed prime minister has yet to prove he has the support of the majority of the MPs in the Dewan Rakyat as required by the federal constitution.

The MPs know it — except for the constitutionally ignorant ones — and so do all the discerning voters that Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim does not have majority support. Perhaps, he knows it, too, and he may have realised that he had made a mistake when he called for a confidence vote after he made all the political parties involved sign a Memorandum of Understanding that they won’t vote against him as prime minister.

Anwar won that vote with a two-thirds majority because all the MPs whose parties were bound by the MoU had no choice but to vote according to the party. Not allowed to vote freely according to the interests of the voters, because of the MoU, how can that confidence vote legitimise his unity government?

That is the crux of the problem. The point is this issue can be easily resolved. Quash the MoU and call for a confidence vote. That is the constitutional way of legitimising a government when no side has a majority — not the way Anwar went about forming the unity government.

If, indeed, it was a mistake, it can be rectified, as said earlier, without an MoU, and if Anwar himself calls for a motion for a confidence vote.

As it is, under Anwar, the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) has called previous premiers for questioning on corruption issues. It has also called former finance minister Daim Zainuddin who held office about 40 years ago for questioning also on suspicion of corruption based on the Pandora Papers.

These are serious allegations levelled at these former high-ranking officials. But with what authority is Anwar allowing these investigations when he does not have the mandate of the majority to do so? This can be considered as abuse of power of the highest order because he is acting without majority support and therefore imposing his will on the majority. That is not democratic but dictatorial.

The issue is not whether there was corruption in the dealings of these former public servants but whether Anwar has the right to be PM without majority support and to undertake such actions without the mandate of the people.

He can not hide behind the king for appointing him nor on the MoU for continuing in government as usual. Without a proven majority, he can not claim that he is leading a constitutional government.

The only solution now — even if it is more than one year too late — is to prove the validity of his government. If Anwar has reason to believe he does not have the support of the majority of the MPs — not political parties as it is the MP’s vote that constitutes support not the parties’ word or signing of an MoU — he should call for a confidence vote.

It is not fair of him to ask the Opposition to prove his validity when he knows their motion for a no-confidence vote may be rejected by the Speaker or relegated to the bottom of the businesses of the day and never see the light of day. In addition, because of the MoU, the Opposition knows they may not get the support of the MPs even of those who want a change of government.

Anwar knows all this. So, asking the Opposition to prove his validity is just a ploy because he knows they won’t win.

Anwar needs to show that he is serious about proving that he has the majority support of the Dewan Rakyat. He should prove it without an MoU. He himself has said that the Opposition doesn’t have the support to call for a no-confidence motion. So, he has nothing to fear.

By calling for a confidence vote, the prime minister will settle the issue of the validity of the unity government once and for all. Whether he wins or the Opposition wins, overnight there will be stability because a constitutional government would be formed. All these unceasing moves to topple the government will immediately stop.

If at all such a move is resorted to in the future it will be for very good reasons that MPs or a political party withdraws support. In the immediate future, however, there would be stability and a government will run unobstructed.

I may be sounding like a broken record. But the legitimacy of a government is found in its adherence to the federal constitution in our form of government. A precedent has been set when the process of forming a government when no party or coalition has a majority has been compromised. If it is not corrected now, unscrupulous leaders will use the precedent to justify establishing themselves as a PM and form an unconstitutional government which will be tolerated.

This can not and must not happen again. By paving the way for a confidence vote Anwar will be setting the example of how to prove the validity of a government. A law or an amendment in standing orders to allow for MPs to move a motion for a confidence/no-confidence vote to prove the legitimacy of a government can come later.

For now, Anwar can restore political stability by simply calling for a confidence vote without the MoU. And it should be conducted by ballot not a voice vote so that a majority even by one vote is recorded.

Well done, Mr Speaker

Uncategorized, , ,

The fact that Dewan Rakyat Speaker Mohamad Ariff Md Yusof has accepted former prime minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad’s request for a motion of no confidence against his successor Muhyiddin Yassin clearly shows he is upholding the Federal Constitution of Malaysia.

Ariff recognises that in a parliamentary democracy — which is the form of government we practise — MPs have the right to move a motion of no confidence against a sitting prime minister — in this case, one who wrenched power from a rightfully elected government and refused to seek legitimacy from the Dewan Rakyat, and, in doing so, abandoned the practices of parliamentary democracy.

In accepting Tun’s proposal for a motion of no confidence against Muhyiddin, Ariff made a decision according to the provisions and spirit of the constitution. Tun had requested two proposals, one was the motion of no confidence against Muhyiddin on the basis that the latter does not command the confidence of the majority of the Dewan Rakyat and the other was to retain the Speaker in his current capacity until Parliament dissolved. Ariff accepted the former but dismissed the latter saying it was not in line with Standing Order 27.

He made the decisions based on the constitution. That is what the people want of our leaders: to follow the constitution. We don’t want leaders who seize power by political means and who do not comply with the constitution. We can’t have leaders who follow one law for themselves and another for others. We want leaders who will uphold the constitution and not circumvent it.

In this case, Ariff set a good example in complying with the expectations and spirit of the constitution.

I wish I could say the same of de facto Parliament and Law Minister Takiyuddin Hassan. He said only government matters will take priority during the one-day May 18 sitting. I wonder if he is aware of how our parliamentary democracy works? Somebody should tell him it is the Speaker who has complete authority over Dewan Rakyat proceedings and there is no authority above him during the sessions. If he doesn’t know this, he should start studying the Westminister-style of the parliamentary system we follow in Malaysia and until he becomes knowledgeable on the subject he should say nothing more on it.

It is nor surprising that Takiyuddin doesn’t seem to know because he is a PAS member and PAS couldn’t care less about parliamentary democracy because they want– at all costs — to establish a syariah-compliant government and a parliamentary democracy is an obstacle to their objective. They would find a monarchy more suited to their feudal concepts of law and government.

When the motion of no confidence is introduced in the Dewan Rakyat, we can except PAS’ 18 MPs to vote against it. But all the remaining 204 MPs minus one (Muhyiddin) should vote for a vote of no confidence in Muhyiddin. Their vote will not be a vote against Muhyiddin’s government but a vote for the continuing practice of parliamentary democracy — that Parliament is the supreme lawmaking institution in Malaysia.

Malay leaders need to demonstrate that they are committed to and will stand by the constitution. It’s time they stopped using politics to seize power and legitimize it even when they go against the grain of the constitution. Non-Malays want a Malay leadership that complies with the constitution as the hope of non-Malays is in the constitution — not in political power.

So, all true-blue Malaysian MPs, Malay or not must fully back Tun’s motion of no confidence in Muhyiddin and cast their vote in favour of parliamentary democracy and vote out Muhyiddin and his government which shows no sign of following parliamentary democracy. Do this for Malaysia.