TJ Ringkas Kapal Berita:

PM baru2 ini mengejutkan orang ramai bila beliau mendedahkan bahawa beliau memantau perbahasan di Parlimen melalui satu kamera TV yang disambung terus ke pejabatnya. Ini dijelaskan apabila beliau memberi amaran kepada MP BN supaya tidak ponteng sesi parlimen.

Sikap Mahathir ini membayangkan bagaimana beliau menganggap MP BN sebagai budak-budak kecil sekolah sahaja yang tidak berdisiplin, ponteng, (atau berdengkur?) oleh itu mereka perlu di perhatikan kerana asyik ponteng.

Yang hairannya MP BN tidak pula menyanggah tindakkan PM, sebaliknya mereka memekik mempertikai hujah pembangkang. Akhirnya speaker pula tidak membenarkan pembangkang bersuara mempertikaikan kehendak Mahathir. Yang mengejutkan speaker mempertahankan Mahathir dan berkata:

"MALAH, Setengah parlimen di negara lain memancarkan secara langsung debat parlimen kepada umum".

Nampaknya logik speaker agak berbelit, tetapi kini ia menyerlahkan bahawa jika rakyat layak menonton, maka PM tentunya lebih layak untuk mamantau atau menonton.

Penulis memberi dua konotasi disebalik pemantauan. Ada dua kemungkinan iaitu orang yang menonton lebih tinggi dari orang yang ditonton seperti ketua jabatan memerhati orang bawahannya dan orang menonton lebih rendah daripada mereka seperti pengerusi memerhati mesyuarat pengarah2.

Oleh itu mengikut logik speaker, PM lebih tinggi kedudukkannya di sisi masyarakat. Hujah ini adalah satu dosa dalam demokrasi kerana beliau telah merendahkan status rakyat. Dalam demokrasi, rakyat lebih TINGGI (supreme). Parlimen adalah satu institusi yang tinggi dalam demokrasi kerana ia mewakili kehendak RAKYAT.

Sebab itulah sesi parlimen dipancarkan terus disesetengah negara kerana rakyat lebih berhak. Merekalah penentu sesuatu kerajaan dan seseorang wakil itu berada di dalam bangunan itu. Hak ini tidak boleh diberikan kepada orang lain yang tidak melantik MP memalui proses demokrasi, walaupun kepada PM sendiri!

Memandangkan tuan speaker sudah berada di kerusi itu sudah lama, sikap beliau dalam isu ini amatlah memalukan dan ia telah menjatuhkan kredibiliti parlimen. Tambah jatuh lagi bila wakil2 BN melalak tidak tentu pasal mempertahankan sikap yang sedemikian...

-Kim Quek-

-TJ Kapal Berita-

Sumber: bunga-raya list

SHAME ON MALAYSIAN PARLIAMENT

08.11.2000

Malaysian Parliament has sunk to another record low in its shameful history as the Supreme Institution in a parliamentary democracy.

Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad recently made the shocking revelation that he had put Parliament under TV surveillance wired directly to his office, when he warned his MPs not to play truant in Parliament. Malaysian Parliament is famous for the frequent stoppages to its sessions due to lack of quorum, as MPs from the ruling party, who occupy three quarter of the seats in the House, are not in the habit of attending Parliament.

The nonsensical drama that unfolded in Parliament following protests from Opposition MPs of this TV surveillance marks the shocking ignorance of the fundamental concept of parliamentary democracy and the slavish mentality of parliamentarians from the ruling party (in particular the Speaker), who are obvious victims of 2 decades of dictatorial rule by Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad.

Instead of jumping up in protest in unison with Opposition MPs at this latest insult from the Prime Minister who had obviously treated them like a bunch of school kids by subjecting them to his personal TV surveillance, MPs from the ruling party acted in the exact opposite. They shouted down the opposition MP who challenged the Prime Ministerˇ¦s right to put Parliament under such surveillance, and the Speaker even went to the ridiculous extreme of prohibiting the Opposition MP from speaking further.

The most shocking and revealing part comes from the Speaker, who defended the Prime Minister's action as not something "extraordinary", and said:

"Some parliaments in other countries EVEN directed the telecast to the public."
(Note the operative word EVEN.)

The Speakerˇ¦s logic seems puzzling on first appearance. However, upon further deliberation, it is clear what the Speaker meant was that, since the people of a country are already entitled to watch the proceedings of parliament through television, the prime minister should of course be EVEN MORE entitled to monitor parliamentary sessions through his TV.

Before we proceed further, we have to understand the connotations associated with TV surveillance. When the head of a department monitors the goings-on in his general office through his TV, it implies he is superior to the people he is monitoring on. Hence, the first connotation is that the surveilant is superior to his objects.

Now, it may be acceptable for the head of a department to do so over his general employees (though many would resent it), it is not acceptable for the chairman of a company to monitor the meetings of the directors through his TV (in case some one else is chairing the meeting). Why? This is because such monitoring is considered below the dignity of the directors. Hence, the second connotation is that only low ranking personnel accept TV surveillance.

With these connotations, the Prime Minister has in effect reduced the status of Parliament to that of a branch in his Prime Minister's Department. Adding salt to injury, he has done so without the knowledge of Parliament. That he did not think it necessary to inform Parliament in advance confirms his utter contempt for that Institution a mere rubber stamp to his will.

Back to the Speaker's logic. When he said the Prime Minister was more (or even equally) entitled to what the people are entitled to when it comes to the right to watch parliamentary sessions in camera, he was committing the cardinal sin in a democracy; he has demeaned the status of the people, and he has also implied that the Prime Minister is above the people. In a democracy, the PEOPLE are supreme. Parliament is the supreme institution in a democracy only because it represents the will of the PEOPLE.

Parliamentary sessions are telecast to the people in some countries, because those governments recognize the people as the supreme masters, and respect their rights to know how their representatives are doing in the House. The same privilege cannot be extended to any individual when the purpose is for surveillance, certainly not even the Prime Minister.

Considering the fact that the Speaker has presided over the House for more than a decade, his low mentality and his shameful conduct only reveals the degraded state of existence of our Parliament. Equally contemptible are the disgraceful behaviours of the MPs from the ruling party, who reacted to such affront on their dignity with such shamelessness.