Interruption without sequence-warnings

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Dr. Wan Junaidi bin Tuanku Jaafar]: Yang Berhormat saya memperingatkan peraturan sahaja Yang Berhormat.

(Honourable Member, I am just reminding the rules).

Tuan Khairy Jamaluddin Rembau: Ya.

(Yes).

Timbalan Yang di-Pertua [Datuk Dr. Wan Junaidi bin Tuanku Jaafar]: Kalau seorang bercakap yang lain duduk.

Itu sahaja.

(If one speaks, others should remain seated. That is all).

Wan Junaidi Tuanku Jaafar was reminding Khalid Samad and Bung Mokhtar unacceptable manner during Khairy Jamaluddin’s turn. They were both standing and kept talking without permission which was against the Rules of Debates 35(2) “If two or more members rise at the same time, the Chair shall call upon the member who first catches his eye.” As for this case, Khalid Samad and Bung Mokhtar had been speaking without any call by the Chairperson.

4.3.3 Interruption without sequence-warnings

How the Chairperson interrupts through affirmations can also be seen in the instances of warnings. Sometimes, warnings can also be in the same category of notifications and reminder.

However, a sign of warning could be easily discerned, as shown in the following extracts:

109 Extract 7

Ahmad Said (from the Alliance) had the floor to second the bill and wished to explain the serious threat of the communist party in Malaya. He wanted to read a report that contained information on the communist movements reported in the Standard Merdeka Souvenir. The article was entitled “Time Was Ripe”. Before he started, the Chairperson asked him how long he would take to read the report. He told the Chairperson that he would read only half of the article. However, after reading about eight sentences, the Chairperson suddenly interrupted him.

Chairperson: Panjang nampaknya itu!

(That seems long!)

Extract 8

Othman Abdullah (from the Parti Islam SeMalaysia [PAS]) explained that there might be a misunderstanding of PAS’s stance on the previous amendment to the Constitution as the PAS members were ‘pro-communist’. He took the accusation seriously and mentioned that one of the MPs was keen to smear PAS during the campaign. When Othman Abdullah tried was trying to explain the misunderstanding more, he was interrupted by the Chairperson.

Chairperson: Jangan meleret.

(Do not drag on).

Extract 9

Othman Abdullah continued his speech to support the Internal Security bill. He mentioned about some MPs who previously joined the Kesatuan Melayu Muda (KMM) and ‘Wataniah’

as among the groups responsible for supporting the British in Malaya. He also added that the matter should not have been debated, but some MPs provoked him to do so. The Chairperson instantly interrupted him.

Chairperson: Dalam Parlimen tidak boleh mengata2.

(Insulting is not allowed in Parliament).

Othman Abdullah: Tadi kawan saya itu berchakap lebeh dahshat daripada itu tidak kena tegor? Tuan Yang di-Pertua…

(Continued his speech until it was completed).

(Just now my friend spoke more terrible things than that but was not warned? Tuan Yang di-Pertua…)

Warnings are often used in parliamentary debates because they are allowed by the Standing Order. Despite the written rules in the Standing Order, the Chairperson also used warnings to ask justification of the points of speech. In extract 7, Ahmad Said read the article after he had told the Chairperson that he would read half of it. In this situation, the Chairperson did not

110

know how long the article was but was convinced by Ahmad Said that it was not long. The Chairperson interrupted Ahmad Said after eight lines. Because this study could not ascertain how long it would take to read the article, including the tempo or laps, it could not accurately analyze the merit of the warning. However, the Chairperson assumed that the article was “too long” after eight lines were read. After confirming that the article was not long, Ahmad Said then continued two more sentences from the article and proceeded with his speech.

Meanwhile, in extract 8, the Chairperson interrupted Othman Abdullah for dragging his speech by giving unnecessary points or examples. He warned Othman Abdullah soon after the latter tried to explain the misunderstanding of PAS being branded as a ‘pro-communist’ party. The debate was about the amendment to the Internal Security Bill. The Chairperson warned Othman Abdullah to not waste his speech by explaining or attempting to ‘clean’ the party from being linked with the communist party. The Chairperson’s ruling was to make sure that the debates did not dwell on a different topic.

Extract 9 also shows that Abdullah was again interrupted by the Chairperson when he tried to respond to some provocations on PAS stance being pro-communists, replying that some MPs supported the British during colonial era. Interruptions are ‘invited’ because MPs often provoke others. In this case, at this point, the Chairperson had to interrupt Othman Abdullah because he gave examples about his opponents’ alleged provocations. Othman Abdullah was ‘invited’ to respond to the provocations, but he was interrupted and warned by the Chairperson as a result.

Othman Abdullah continued his speech and retorted that other MPs were not warned or interrupted by the Chairperson even though they did the same.

From Extract 7, 8 and 9, the Chairperson has varies of interruption purposes as mechanism through warning. Indirectly, the Chairperson ‘form’ a way of asking a justification on a point of debate (Extract 7), hybrid form of warning which turns into a reminder and controlling the point of discussion (Extract 8) and maneuvering the point of discussion through warning which again became a reminder to the respective MP (Extract 9). Hence, warning may not be a sole mechanism for a strict reminder, but also an option to maneuver a discussion.

111