#kerajaangagal17 – If an emergency cannot suspend the Judiciary, how can it suspend Parliament which is the other branch in the tripod of Executive, Legislature and Judiciary in the doctrine of separation of powers?

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) Takiyuddin Hassan has advised heads of services in the government to be more careful when speaking about the law and to refrain from making interpretations based on emotions.

Shouldn’t this apply to Cabinet Ministers, and in particular, to he himself as the Minister in the Prime Minister in charge of law and Parliament?

I want to ask Takiyuddin if an emergency cannot suspend the Judiciary, how can it suspend Parliament which is the other branch in the tripod of Executive, Legislature and Judiciary in the doctrine of separation of powers?

I want to refer to his recent statement after more than three months after the declaration of emergency that Parliament will be called to convene when the right time comes either before or after the Covid-19 emergency ends, as it was the best evidence of a kakistocracy and #kerajaangagal.

Takiyuddin is belabouring under a most wrong and fallacious notion that he controls Parliament and decides whether Parliament can convene or not, that he is more powerful and more important than the Parliament Speaker, who is reduced in his eyes to a mere factotum.

Does Takiyuddin realise that the Speaker of Dewan Rakyat ranks No. 13 on the protocol list, as published in the Federal Order of Precedence, while a Cabinet Minister – including the Minister of Prime Minister’s Department (Parliament and Law) – is lower down the list, ranked No. 16 in the protocol list?

So it is a ridiculous notion if the Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department regards himself as the Master of Parliament, who alone decides whether Parliament can meet or not.

Under the Malaysian Constitution, which accepts the doctrine of the separation of powers, no Minister – not even the Prime Minister – can control or overrule Parliament, as otherwise it would make nonsense of the concept of Parliamentary oversight and scrutiny of the Executive and to be a constitutional check-and-balance of the Executive.

When Parliament convenes is not decided by Takiyuddin or the Prime Minister, but by the Malaysian Constitution which the Cabinet, including Takiyuddin, had violated in not allowing Parliament to meet.

It is not for Takiyuddin or any other Minister to seek the advice of the relevant agencies, especially the Health Ministry, on the convening of Parliament, but for the Speaker and the relevant Parliamentary Committees of MPs to seek the advice of the relevant agencies and to come to a decision what safeguards to take when facing the Covid-19 pandemic on the convening of Parliament.

The Muhyiddin Cabinet has turned the Malaysian Constitution upside down on its head.

It should not continue to ignore and violate the Constitution but should decide this Wednesday to advice the Yang di Pertuan Agong to convene Parliament – and leave the consequential matters like what safeguards to take in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic (with a threatening Fourth Covid Wave) to the Speaker and the relevant Parliamentary Committees.

Coming back to the issue at hand, would Takiyuddin agree that it is grave abuse of power and malpractice for the Home Minister and not the Inspector-General of Police to decide who should be the Chief Police Officers of the various states, and whether he would advise the Home Minister not to transgress into the jurisdiction, powers and responsibilities of the IGP?