COMMENT | The May 18 Parliamentary sitting. Was it a sitting in law? Does it by convention fulfill the test or was it not? 

Parliament without performing its entire function is just a building. The brief sitting by our MPs, was that called a Parliamentary sitting? 

Did our Parliament give up its obligations to the people and serve only the interest of the executive? These are the questions ringing in most introspective Malaysian minds.

This question is pivotal for the effective functioning of democracy in Malaysia. Many experts on constitution, law and regency have proffered their minds. But are they making sense to the majority simple minds? Societies everywhere are abuzz talking about it.

Does only the opening speech by Yang di-Pertuan Agong alone constitute a Parliamentary sitting? Because if it is not, Parliament will by now stand dissolved and we should go for the 15th general elections. 

To answer this, some people are already knocking the doors of our judiciary. Will the courts hurriedly hear this alarming case? Because anything can happen between now a possibly dissolved Parliament and the time the courts disposes of this matter.

What does our Federal Constitution say? Article 60 says: "The Yang di-Pertuan Agong may address either the House of Parliament or both houses jointly". Note the word "may", not "shall" which would have made it compulsory. So the opening of the Parliament by His Majesty does not seem to be mandatory.

Hence the question in people’s mind is if the opening address of His Majesty is not compulsory, how does having it constitute a legitimate sitting to satisfy the fatal requirement of 60 days between two sittings? 

Does the assembly of MPs and sitting on their chairs even momentarily constitute a sitting? Or does the Parliament now stands dissolved or not?

Constitutional experts say a sitting means it must conduct its business. The  Parliament website defines its functions as a legislative body for the federal government that passes and amends federal laws, scrutinises government policies and approves government budgets and proposal for new taxes. 

So, did our Parliament perform these businesses on May 18? Clearly no. Did the Parliament function as a Parliament on that day? No. Not at all.

The Covid-19 excuse given by the Government makes no sense. Commercial activities are now allowed. But not Parliament? Rather Parliaments in other countries have gone ahead adapting to the new realities resulting from Covid-19 pandemic. They have gone virtual. Why is not, Malaysia? 

Are we so backwards in terms of harnessing the benefits of cyberworld? Or do we have an unworthy Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission Minister with no advice to the cabinet?

People are asking if the Parliaments around the world can sit and conduct their business virtually, why can’t Malaysia? Are the technological tools required for a virtual sitting of Parliament not available to us? What nonsense. Are Malaysians that stupid or does the government just think they are?

At the time of such great adversity and woes, public anxiety is running very high. We cannot imagine a better time when people need their Parliamentarians more to help them mitigate and alleviate their pains and sufferings. Never have we ever been so dreadfully distressed.

It is the duty of the MPs to take to Parliament the people’s cries. And it is the government’s ultimate business to hear and provide for the people. 

Yes, the massive health support and movement control order (MCO) restrictions have been very commendable. But what about peoples daily life, economy? jobs? businesses? Was even the Prihatin stimulus package provided when it was most needed?

The only way the government can provide support for the people is by coming up with measures to alleviate people’s suffering and jump-start commercial activities. 

This is only possible if the measures are debated in Parliament and all MPs from both sides of the divide raises their concerns and debated on before it is voted in. Why do we actually need a Parliament and parliamentarians if this basic element is entirely ignored?

To our simple mind, The government must function. Whether it is legitimate or not is another matter. 

For the government to function, the Parliament must function. Right? For the parliament to function, our MPs must attend and deal with the issues in hand. If the government does not present the supply bill, the people will to grave consequences, not be legally provided.

Unprecedented times call for unprecedented measures. But this government even failed to perform its basic function of legally providing for the people. 

The May 18 sitting did not even consider to legitimise the emergency pandemic bill for RM260 billion. How do we know where the money came from and where did it really did go? Seriously.

How do we know it is wisely spent? Did it really go to the needy? Or like a RM35 basket for RM100, more money filled the pockets of cronies than to the needy. 

After all, the kleptocrats are back in government and heading government-linked companies. Theft and plundering flashes through the mind. 

Without passing a supply bill through Parliament at its first opportunity, the whole RM260 billion spending becomes unlawful. For failing to conduct this serious business, can the Parliament on May 18 be intrinsically be considered a sitting?

We know the Perikatan Nasional government is trying to avoid a no-confidence motion against the Prime Minister Muhyiddin Yassin who is presently leading a treacherous cabinet that was not voted to power. 

We also know the government is not presenting either a confidence motion to legitimate its rule. We also know too that the PN government fears that if its supply bill is voted out, along with the possibilities above, the government must resign. Hence to overcome the risk, it prefers to continue functioning irregularly.

This pandemic has created a new normal. More and more business is now being conducted in the "air" than physically down here on earth. 

The new world has expanded into unlimited virtual space. But we are still hopelessly grounded simply because the new set of ministers woefully does not have the proficiency, proclivity nor the will to harness, in good faith, this limitless resource.

There is really no excuse. Representations and scrutiny by our Parliamentarians cannot wait in this unique time. Our MPs need to keep their promises to their constituents and honour their obligations. 

The business of Parliament must continue in order to lend legitimacy to everything that the government does. It cannot continue irregularly in this absurd manner. Our democracy seems dead. Ignore it at our own peril.

It is no point flogging a dead horse. "The will of the people is the only legitimate foundation of any government and to protect its free expression should be our first object" – Thomas Jefferson. And this is not happening.

The country might as well go for a fresh general election so that the people can elect a legitimate government and start all over again. 

Yes, it is a difficult time, but the difficulty is on the people, not the government which already seem to have hands in every jar we have. The most pitiful is Tabung Haji, where money reserved for the pilgrimage is also not spared.

The layman’s verdict is clear. The May 18 sitting fails to qualify as a sitting that fulfills constitutional requirements. 

Neither did it qualify by measure of any codified conventions, practices and precedents in any part of the world that practices the Westminster system of governance.

SARAJUN HODA is a social activist with Aliran and former deputy chairperson of Bersih 2.0.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.