Written by: Averroes
As of today, our Malaysian Parliament had withdrawn the Constitution (Amendment No.2) Bill 2019 (to limit the term of the Prime Minister to two (2), terms) and the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill which was quoted by the Minister in the Prime Minister's Department, Datuk Takiyuddin Hassan.
He had done so in the bid to when he had rescinded it (the Constitutional Amendment) as the Perikatan Nasional political coalition that is administering the nation after a plight of party-hopping occurred late in February, dismantling the mandated Pakatan Harapan, decided to cancel it last March. It was actually tabled as early as December 2019 and was scheduled to be debated as of March the following year.
According to Communications and Multimedia Minister Saifuddin Abdullah states that the decision to rescind the bill was approved by all the Cabinet members of the PN coalition, together with him which was unanimous. The only reason as to why the PN coalition did so was because it is the idea of the past government based on different ideologies and perspectives. They even added that they were not required to give the reasoning as under Order 61 of the Standing Orders of Dewan Rakyat.
That is an appalling, silly yet sadistic excuse given by the current coalition as if the abuse of power and unyielding excessive authority is tolerated and embraced without remorse in this beautiful country we call Malaysia.
This postulation of limiting the term was manifested by the former Prime Minister, Tun Dr. Mahathir as he intends to cap the tenure in office of the Prime Minister, Menteri Besar to two (2), terms which is ten, (10) years as a term is five, (5) years during which the period a parliament is in operation before it dissolves for a General Election. This may be found as under article 55(3) & (4) of the Federal Constitution which states the following;
Article 55(3); "Parliament unless sooner dissolved, shall continue for five years from the date of its first meeting and shall then stand dissolved."
Article 55(4); "Whenever Parliament is dissolved a general election shall be held within sixty days from the date of the dissolution and Parliament shall be summoned to meet on a date not later than one hundred and twenty days from that date."
The amendment can be said to alter the wordings as under article 43 of the Federal Constitution as under clause (2) to include a new paragraph (c) to limit such appointment of Prime Minister to a two, (2) term of maximum ten, (10) years.
Though it was part of the Pakatan Harapan Coalition manifesto after the GE-14 victory as of 9th of May, its implementation was hewed with the emergence of a political mutiny. This may sound as of a voice of repentance and mortification of the past Prime Minister during his 22 year tenure as premier of Malaysia between 1981 until 2003, we should not disregard his previous past to change the landscape and ambience of our country to be corruption-free and cleansed from the lechery of excessive powers and malversation.
Historically speaking, the US is among the countries to adopt this approach
As of 27th February, 1951 the 22nd Constitutional Amendment was made to limit the terms employed by the American president which ceased the impeding controversy over Franklin Roosevelt's four elected terms to the White Hose. Minnesota was the 36th State to approve such amendment to gauge for the three-quarters threshold required for it to be enforced. If not, the period for becoming a president had no limits which went on for 105 years in the US
The amendment read, "No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once."
The earliest precedent which is a convention not legally enshrined was when in 1796, George Washington decided to establish it months before an election to refuse a third term. His voluntary act of rejecting a third term was viewed as a safeguard which opposes the draconian practices of the British Crown during the age of colonialism.
As of now, China decided to repeal their presidential term limit that was made in the 1990s. This repeal was passed in the National People's Congress with only two voted against and three abstained out of 2,964 votes, which elevated his name to be at par with the founder of the party and country, Chairman Mao Zedong!
This was followed by Russia recently during this covid-19 pandemic where 78% of the population voted yes as according to Russia's General Election Commission. Though the constitution required him (President Vladimir Putin) to forfeit after his six-year term meets its expiry date in 2024, the referendum vote by the people legitimised him to remain twice more even after two decades of governance. He may now stay in office until 2036. He may well be in his 80s once his term is over.
In conclusion, the author believes that there should be some term to limit the period of administration by the Head of Government as a check and balance as well as to introduce new people in the political scene and prevent any further impingement onto the Rule of Law in the country and ensure a stable and clean engineering of good governance in a country. If not, we should seek other alternatives, create more provisions, statutes and develop precedents to serve as a ringing bell toward the administrators of our country that they are not above the law and bound by the constitution.
References,
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-43361276
https://www.history.com/news/why-presidents-have-term-limits
Comments
Post a Comment