Quick, send in the clowns. There ought to be clowns.
Isn’t it bliss? One who keeps fooling around.
Don’t you love a farce? What a surprise and cliche.
But where are the clowns? Don’t bother they’re here.
Song by Frank Sinatra ~ Paraphrased and edited by me.
Clowns is how I describe our politicians for fools.
It is to provoke my fellow citizens of Malaysia to reflect in regret.
How we voted (foolishly) for our representatives to Parliament.
Those who prefer to clowning in shallow intellectualism.
Let’s start with the so-called legal experts.
1. Constitutional lawyer Lim Wei Jiet – says that “no law had to be changed to enable this” (virtual Parliament session).
https://www.nst.com.my/news/politics/2020/05/592433/no-legal-obstacle-conducting-virtual-sessions
2. Professor Datuk Salleh Buang, a former AGC/ Senior Federal Counsel – says that physical Dewan Rakyat sittings in the House were a convention rather than a legal obligation.
https://www.pressreader.com/malaysia/new-straits-times/20200514/281517933303736
3. Bersih 2.0’s steering committee – says that some of the total 222 MPs can connect remotely from their home… via video link.
4. DAP Supremo YB Lim Kit Siang – wants virtual parliamentary meetings for at least 10 days.
https://www.thesundaily.my/home/call-for-10-days-of-virtual-parliamentary-meeting-NA2310960
5. YB Yeo Bee Yin – says her successor Khairy should offer technological solutions for Dewan Rakyat to meet virtually.
https://www.themalaysianinsight.com/s/246053
6. Tawfik Ismail starts online petition for a virtual Parliament.
https://www.change.org/p/malaysian-voters-virtual-parliament-for-malaysia
I’M SO SORRY TO RAIN ON YOUR PARADE OF CLOWNS.
7. Let’s start with the Federal Constitution Articles 63 (1), (2) and (3).
IMMUNITY from civil or criminal proceedings & PRIVILEGE are granted to MPs debating issues in the House of Parliament.
There are exceptions as highlighted under Article 63 (4) and (5) and Article 10 (4).
8. Just ask lawyer Syahredzan Johan – “Anything that you say in Parliament cannot be subjected to any criminal charge or cannot be questioned in any court at all.
9. The only defense YB Nurul Izzah had from the Sedition Act – hers was a borderline case.
Her speech was made within the physical and geographical confines of the House of Parliament.
10. My answer to Lim Wei Jiet.
Since you call yourself a Constitution expert, I assume that you must be aware of the existence of Articles 63 (1), (2) and (3) of the Federal Constitution and the relevant laws on IMMUNITY & PRIVILEGE.
It would be impolite for me to ask you for the identity of your client or who you’re taking instructions from.
Awakening Moses Wong 