Pub Date : 2022-07-27DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v2i.56
A. A. Aslan
The frequent occurrences of misconduct among Members of Parliament during the Dewan Rakyat sessions highlight the importance of a code of conduct in ensuring the sessions are conducted in a constructive and conducive environment. Sexist, racist and immature remarks uttered during sessions, as well as acts of discrimination against youth and minority groups, indicate the inability of MPs to conduct themselves respectfully and directly influence the levels of diversity and inclusivity in the Malaysian Parliament. This research study was conducted in two phases, with the aim to assess the public’s knowledge, attitude and perception of the behaviour of MPs during the sessions and identify different perspectives through the lens of MPs themselves on these issues. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with a total of 1071 respondents aged 18 years and above participating in the online public survey in the first phase. A semi-structured interview with a total of six MPs was done in the second phase of the study using purposive sampling. The results of the online survey confirmed that the public is more aware of the existence of misconduct among MPs and the discrimination faced by MPs who are members of marginalised groups such as women, youth, and minorities. Four themes emerged from the interview with the MPs; parliamentary reforms, discriminatory comments, the role of the speaker and journalism bias. Findings from the current study concluded that although there was a higher awareness rate among the public about the misconduct of MPs, there was contradictory opinion highlighted from the MPs’ perspectives, indicating the need to look at the gap between the public and MPs’ understanding of these issues.
{"title":"Conduct in the House of Representatives (Dewan Rakyat) Parliament Malaysia","authors":"A. A. Aslan","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v2i.56","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.56","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000The frequent occurrences of misconduct among Members of Parliament during the Dewan Rakyat sessions highlight the importance of a code of conduct in ensuring the sessions are conducted in a constructive and conducive environment. Sexist, racist and immature remarks uttered during sessions, as well as acts of discrimination against youth and minority groups, indicate the inability of MPs to conduct themselves respectfully and directly influence the levels of diversity and inclusivity in the Malaysian Parliament. This research study was conducted in two phases, with the aim to assess the public’s knowledge, attitude and perception of the behaviour of MPs during the sessions and identify different perspectives through the lens of MPs themselves on these issues. A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted with a total of 1071 respondents aged 18 years and above participating in the online public survey in the first phase. A semi-structured interview with a total of six MPs was done in the second phase of the study using purposive sampling. The results of the online survey confirmed that the public is more aware of the existence of misconduct among MPs and the discrimination faced by MPs who are members of marginalised groups such as women, youth, and minorities. Four themes emerged from the interview with the MPs; parliamentary reforms, discriminatory comments, the role of the speaker and journalism bias. Findings from the current study concluded that although there was a higher awareness rate among the public about the misconduct of MPs, there was contradictory opinion highlighted from the MPs’ perspectives, indicating the need to look at the gap between the public and MPs’ understanding of these issues.\u0000\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125991233","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-27DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v2i.66
Mohamad Haniki Nik Mohamed, Nor Ilyani Mohamed Nazar, I. E. Ridzwan, Norhidayah Mohd Taufek, Norny Syafinaz Ab Rahman
The United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) ranked cannabis as the most widely used substance worldwide in 2021. It has been predicted that the use will dramatically increase in the next five years due to an increasing number of countries starting to legalise it for medical purposes. In 1983, Malaysia declared the substance use problem as a national emergency. Since then, the government has taken many steps to establish a ‘country without illicit drugs’. To analyse risks, benefits and regulations of medical cannabis, a narrative review synthesising the findings of literature retrieved from computerised database search was conducted. Increasing evidence shows that legalising cannabis leads to an increased number of people starting to abuse this substance and become dependent on it, including the country that became the first to legalise cannabis. Although there are claims and studies reported that medical cannabis is needed to treat certain diseases, the decision to legalise cannabis in Malaysia needs to carefully weigh the risks and benefits. After all, there are other FDA-approved medicines clinically proven to be safe and effective alternatives that are currently available to treat such diseases. The control of cannabis licensing and selling needs to be taken into serious consideration before deciding on the regulatory status of cannabis. Therefore, the best way to prevent the spike of cannabis abuse in Malaysia is by prohibiting possession, planting, harvesting and processing cannabis, even for personal use. The lack of high-quality clinical trials regarding the benefits and harms of cannabis for medical purposes should also be a major consideration before the decision to legalise cannabis is made.
{"title":"Preventing Oversight on Medical Cannabis Legislation in Malaysia: Analysis of Risks, Benefits and Regulation Requirements","authors":"Mohamad Haniki Nik Mohamed, Nor Ilyani Mohamed Nazar, I. E. Ridzwan, Norhidayah Mohd Taufek, Norny Syafinaz Ab Rahman","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v2i.66","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.66","url":null,"abstract":"The United Nations Office on Drug and Crime (UNODC) ranked cannabis as the most widely used substance worldwide in 2021. It has been predicted that the use will dramatically increase in the next five years due to an increasing number of countries starting to legalise it for medical purposes. In 1983, Malaysia declared the substance use problem as a national emergency. Since then, the government has taken many steps to establish a ‘country without illicit drugs’. To analyse risks, benefits and regulations of medical cannabis, a narrative review synthesising the findings of literature retrieved from computerised database search was conducted. Increasing evidence shows that legalising cannabis leads to an increased number of people starting to abuse this substance and become dependent on it, including the country that became the first to legalise cannabis. Although there are claims and studies reported that medical cannabis is needed to treat certain diseases, the decision to legalise cannabis in Malaysia needs to carefully weigh the risks and benefits. After all, there are other FDA-approved medicines clinically proven to be safe and effective alternatives that are currently available to treat such diseases. The control of cannabis licensing and selling needs to be taken into serious consideration before deciding on the regulatory status of cannabis. Therefore, the best way to prevent the spike of cannabis abuse in Malaysia is by prohibiting possession, planting, harvesting and processing cannabis, even for personal use. The lack of high-quality clinical trials regarding the benefits and harms of cannabis for medical purposes should also be a major consideration before the decision to legalise cannabis is made.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"14 5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129326637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-27DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v2i.63
Augustine Leonard Jen
The Independent Police Conduct Commission (IPCC) Bill 2020 was enacted to replace the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill 2019. This Bill contains 47 Clauses compared to 60 Clauses in the previous Bill. The IPCC 2020 Bill was enacted to enhance the integrity of the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), reduce misconduct among PDRM members and encourage public confidence in the police force. However, the IPCC 2020 Bill still invites controversy and negative connotations that deserve attention. This paper looks at the issues that have arisen regarding these two bills.
{"title":"Polemik Rang Undang-undang Suruhanjaya Bebas Aduan Salah Laku Polis 2019 (RUU IPCMC 2019) dan Rang Undang-undang Suruhanjaya Bebas Tatakelakuan Polis 2020 (RUU IPCC 2020)","authors":"Augustine Leonard Jen","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v2i.63","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.63","url":null,"abstract":"The Independent Police Conduct Commission (IPCC) Bill 2020 was enacted to replace the Independent Police Complaints and Misconduct Commission (IPCMC) Bill 2019. This Bill contains 47 Clauses compared to 60 Clauses in the previous Bill. The IPCC 2020 Bill was enacted to enhance the integrity of the Royal Malaysia Police (PDRM), reduce misconduct among PDRM members and encourage public confidence in the police force. However, the IPCC 2020 Bill still invites controversy and negative connotations that deserve attention. This paper looks at the issues that have arisen regarding these two bills.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"203 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123041712","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-27DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v2i.60
Ikmal Hisham Md Tah, Muthanna Saari, Faridah Jalil, Idzuafi Hadi Kamilan, Akmal Hisham Abd Rahim
Parliament represents an ever-important institution in the nation-building of a country. Parliament is committed to its oversight function towards the executive action of the government and represents the voice of the people through its elected representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (House ofRepresentatives) of Malaysia. The Dewan Negara (House of Senate) plays its check and balance role in the decisions taken in the Dewan Rakyat. Therefore, Parliament as an institution needs a parliamentary service system that is independent and efficient to provide impartial support to members of the House. Since the Parliamentary Service Act 1963 was abolished in 1993, there has been no specific legislation on parliamentary services in place in Malaysia. This has resulted in parliamentary staff being bound under the Federal Public Service. However, in the current context of modern parliament, there is a pressing need for legislation on parliamentary service to be introduced to ensure the empowerment and independence of parliamentary institutions in uplifting the quality of parliamentary representation in Malaysia. The practice in several countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, is compared to evaluate the need to reintroduce the parliamentary service act. This article finally sets out to recommend the reintroduction of the act to ensure parliament’s check and balance function can be discharged accordingly.
{"title":"Keperluan Mewujudkan Semula Akta Perkhidmatan Parlimen di Malaysia","authors":"Ikmal Hisham Md Tah, Muthanna Saari, Faridah Jalil, Idzuafi Hadi Kamilan, Akmal Hisham Abd Rahim","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v2i.60","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.60","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000\u0000\u0000Parliament represents an ever-important institution in the nation-building of a country. Parliament is committed to its oversight function towards the executive action of the government and represents the voice of the people through its elected representatives to the Dewan Rakyat (House ofRepresentatives) of Malaysia. The Dewan Negara (House of Senate) plays its check and balance role in the decisions taken in the Dewan Rakyat. Therefore, Parliament as an institution needs a parliamentary service system that is independent and efficient to provide impartial support to members of the House. Since the Parliamentary Service Act 1963 was abolished in 1993, there has been no specific legislation on parliamentary services in place in Malaysia. This has resulted in parliamentary staff being bound under the Federal Public Service. However, in the current context of modern parliament, there is a pressing need for legislation on parliamentary service to be introduced to ensure the empowerment and independence of parliamentary institutions in uplifting the quality of parliamentary representation in Malaysia. The practice in several countries, such as the United Kingdom, Australia, New Zealand and Canada, is compared to evaluate the need to reintroduce the parliamentary service act. This article finally sets out to recommend the reintroduction of the act to ensure parliament’s check and balance function can be discharged accordingly.\u0000\u0000\u0000","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"23 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125458859","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-27DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v2i.58
Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil
The right to life is one of the fundamental aspects of human rights. Without this right, people risk losing other rights, such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech and opinion, freedom of movement, property ownership rights, and many more. Protecting the right to life is foundational to the building of civilisation, without it, it is impossible to sustain a civilised culture and achieve technological advancement. Hence, jurists and philosophers are unanimous in considering this right to be inalienable and non-negotiable. While Syariah recognises the right to life of each and every human, it also posits that humankind is the prize of God’s creation. Because humans were created by God, a human’s right to life ultimately belongs to God. For God gives life, and He is the one who takes it back. Therefore, human lives are sacred, according to the Syariah, and it is a crime to take another human’s life without a just cause. In this regard, Syariah has prescribed retaliation (qisas) that prescribes the death penalty for intentional murder. This article examines the human right to life from both perspectives of Islam and the Federal Constitution. It also analyses the position of the death penalty in the legal context in Malaysia and the Shariah’s view. This paper also examines the demands of international law on the abolition of the death penalty and what the Shariah response is in this regard.
{"title":"Hak untuk Hidup dan Hukuman Mati: Respons Syariah terhadap Perundangan Antarabangsa","authors":"Mohamed Azam Mohamed Adil","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v2i.58","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v2i.58","url":null,"abstract":"The right to life is one of the fundamental aspects of human rights. Without this right, people risk losing other rights, such as freedom of religion, freedom of speech and opinion, freedom of movement, property ownership rights, and many more. Protecting the right to life is foundational to the building of civilisation, without it, it is impossible to sustain a civilised culture and achieve technological advancement. Hence, jurists and philosophers are unanimous in considering this right to be inalienable and non-negotiable. While Syariah recognises the right to life of each and every human, it also posits that humankind is the prize of God’s creation. Because humans were created by God, a human’s right to life ultimately belongs to God. For God gives life, and He is the one who takes it back. Therefore, human lives are sacred, according to the Syariah, and it is a crime to take another human’s life without a just cause. In this regard, Syariah has prescribed retaliation (qisas) that prescribes the death penalty for intentional murder. This article examines the human right to life from both perspectives of Islam and the Federal Constitution. It also analyses the position of the death penalty in the legal context in Malaysia and the Shariah’s view. This paper also examines the demands of international law on the abolition of the death penalty and what the Shariah response is in this regard.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"20 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2022-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122695120","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-18DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v1i.27
Rais Yatim
This paper recommends that members of the legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as Members of the State Legislative Assembly (ADUN), be swaddled by a Legislative Ethics. This matter should be made compulsory considering that negative influence has begun to take root among the Honourable Members. If this trend goes unchecked, the Parliament and the State Legislative Assembly (DUN) will soon emerge as institutions eclipse in values and virtues or will be seen as institutions with eroding values and virtues. The future integrity of the nation must be assured. This can be achieved if the character and conduct of the Malaysian legislature are being guided in a positive manner.
{"title":"Etika Legislatif untuk Wakil Rakyat","authors":"Rais Yatim","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v1i.27","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v1i.27","url":null,"abstract":"This paper recommends that members of the legislature consisting of the House of Representatives and the Senate, as well as Members of the State Legislative Assembly (ADUN), be swaddled by a Legislative Ethics. This matter should be made compulsory considering that negative influence has begun to take root among the Honourable Members. If this trend goes unchecked, the Parliament and the State Legislative Assembly (DUN) will soon emerge as institutions eclipse in values and virtues or will be seen as institutions with eroding values and virtues. The future integrity of the nation must be assured. This can be achieved if the character and conduct of the Malaysian legislature are being guided in a positive manner.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"117275281","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-18DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v1i.30
N. Anwar, Nurul Jannah Mohd Jailani
At present, the ability of the Malaysian Legislature – specifically the House of Representatives (Dewan Rakyat) – to effectively check and balance the powers of the Executive is impeded by the lack of a formal mechanism enabling the deliberation and debate of Private Member’s Bills. The Government or the Executive branch remains the primary agenda-setter in Parliamentary sittings, thus undermining the full extent of legislative independence and representative debate taking place in the August House. Drawing on local and international examples, this article argues in favour of allocating space to Private Member’s Bills within the parliamentary agenda and consequently returning legislators their rights and agencies towards strengthening Malaysia’s parliamentary democracy.
{"title":"Strengthening Malaysian Parliamentary Democracy Through Private Member’s Bills","authors":"N. Anwar, Nurul Jannah Mohd Jailani","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v1i.30","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v1i.30","url":null,"abstract":"At present, the ability of the Malaysian Legislature – specifically the House of Representatives (Dewan Rakyat) – to effectively check and balance the powers of the Executive is impeded by the lack of a formal mechanism enabling the deliberation and debate of Private Member’s Bills. The Government or the Executive branch remains the primary agenda-setter in Parliamentary sittings, thus undermining the full extent of legislative independence and representative debate taking place in the August House. Drawing on local and international examples, this article argues in favour of allocating space to Private Member’s Bills within the parliamentary agenda and consequently returning legislators their rights and agencies towards strengthening Malaysia’s parliamentary democracy.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"54 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122481412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-06-18DOI: 10.54313/journalmp.v1i.29
Z. Azmi
This write-up looks into the political situation that existed in Malaysia commencing with the 2018 General Election when Pakatan Harapan toppled the long-established Barisan Nasional and thereafter fall of Pakatan Harapan (PH) Government in 2020. Thereafter the Perikatan Nasional (PN) led by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin took over the government. The PN Government was accused of being a back-door government. Immediately after PN took over the Government, the world, including Malaysia, faced the Covid-19 pandemic. At the same time, the PN Government, which included UMNO and PAS, had only a very small majority in Parliament. The issue of the Government invoking the Emergency powers under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution was extensively discussed amongst the politicians and writers. Article 150 became very relevant. A major part of this write-up (which is supported by legal authorities) involves the legality of the Government invoking Article 150 towards fighting the Covid-19 pandemic in Malaysia.
{"title":"Government’s Powers During an Emergency","authors":"Z. Azmi","doi":"10.54313/journalmp.v1i.29","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54313/journalmp.v1i.29","url":null,"abstract":"This write-up looks into the political situation that existed in Malaysia commencing with the 2018 General Election when Pakatan Harapan toppled the long-established Barisan Nasional and thereafter fall of Pakatan Harapan (PH) Government in 2020. Thereafter the Perikatan Nasional (PN) led by Tan Sri Muhyiddin Yassin took over the government. The PN Government was accused of being a back-door government. Immediately after PN took over the Government, the world, including Malaysia, faced the Covid-19 pandemic. At the same time, the PN Government, which included UMNO and PAS, had only a very small majority in Parliament. The issue of the Government invoking the Emergency powers under Article 150 of the Federal Constitution was extensively discussed amongst the politicians and writers. Article 150 became very relevant. A major part of this write-up (which is supported by legal authorities) involves the legality of the Government invoking Article 150 towards fighting the Covid-19 pandemic in Malaysia.","PeriodicalId":164136,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Malaysian Parliament","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-06-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125834460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：