AN OPPOSITION member of the State Legislative Assembly believes that a motion moved yesterday by Minister of Tourism, Arts, Culture, Youth and Sports Datuk Abdul Karim Rahman Hamzah “is not in order for debate”.
See Chee How (PKR-Batu Lintang), who cited Standing Order 23(1), said even though the Standing Order stated that a ministerial motion does not require a notice, there is certain procedure to adhere to.
See Chee How
“I don’t want to go into the merits of the matter but just the notice. It is stated under Standing Order 23(1) that of course a notice is not required if it is a ministerial motion or is sanctioned by the Speaker,” he said.
He made these remarks when debating the motion, which sought the House’s approval to appeal against the recent decision of the Court of Appeal in upholding the High Court’s decision to reinstate Dr Ting Tiong Choon as the Pujut assemblyman.
See, who referred to a page (P.394) of the Standing Order, told the House that the question was not whether the notice was required.
“It appears that we have to go through the procedure, that there must be a sanction from the Speaker. It must be put to the House that there is an agreement in the House, that the notice is not required,” he said.
Only then could the motion be debated in the august house, he added.
He said other questions with regard to the notice had to be looked into rather than merely judging on the nature that it was a ministerial motion.
“Such as the matters raised, substantive or procedural, that were put forward in this motion. So I believe this motion is not in order for debate this morning (yesterday).
“Of course my fellow colleagues (other opposition members) have spoken out that you could have just brought the matter to the (Federal) Court for leave.
“Because even in the earlier stage, leave was not actually asked for from this House for the matter to be taken by the DUN (State Legislative Assembly) to the Court of Appeal in appealing against the decision (of the High Court),” he pointed out.
As such, See reiterated that “it is not in order for the motion to be brought in this manner in this august house this morning (yesterday).”