Before Parliament accedes to the request of the Election Commission for a further constitutional amendment, it should set up an inquiry committee to investigate how the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Cabinet and Parliament could commit a colossal constitutional blunder as to make the electoral constituencies redelineation exercise null and void

by Parliamentary Opposition Leader, DAP Secretary-General and MP for Tanjung, Lim Kit Siang, in Petaling Jaya on Tuesday, 30th March 1993:

Before Parliament accedes to the request of the Election Commission for a further constitutional amendment, it should set up an inquiry committee to investigate how the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Cabinet and Parliament could commit a colossal constitutional blunder as to make the electoral constituencies redelineation exercise null and void

The Election Commission Secretary, Datuk Abdul Rashid Haji Abdul Rahman, said yesterday that the Election Commission would resume ¬its electoral constituency redelineation exercise as soon as the Government makes the necessary rectification to the Federal Constitut¬ion at next month’s Parliament sitting.

DAP has not been convinced that there is anything wrong with the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act passed by Parliament last October, and sees no reason why there should be a further constitu-tional amendment.

The reason why the Election Commission had to cancel its constituency redelineation exercise was because it was caught ‘red-handed’ in acting unconstitutionally in redrawing electoral constituencies before the expiry of the minimum eight-year period from the previous redelineation, taking political directives from the Barisan Nasional and in particular UMNO, and violating the democratic principle of ‘one-man, one-vote’.

The Election Commission would have been able to brazen through with its illegal and unconstitutional constituency redelinea¬tion exercise if the DAP had not taken it to court, and this is the reason for the Election Commission’s surrender in the Kuala Lumpur High Court- and why the DAP’s legal victory ‘without contest’ in this case is very significant and historic.

DAP to propose in Parliament the establishment of an inquiry committee as to whether there is a need for a constitutional amendment to the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act on constituency redelineation

The DAP rejects the Election Commission’s argument and call on the Government to reject the Commission attempt to put the blame for the cancellation of the constituency redelineation exercise on the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act – as this would mean that the Attorney-General’s Chambers, Cabinet Ministers and all Members of Parliamentary had been negligent in passing such a constitutional amendment lat October.

Before Parliament accedes to the request of the Election Commission for a further constitutional amendment, it should set up an inquiry committee to investigate how the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Cabinet and Parliament could commit such a grave constitutional blunder making the electoral constituency redelineation exercise null and void.

If the Attorney-General’s Chambers and the Cabinet and the Cabinet Ministers do not mind being made to look foolish and become the ‘scapegoats’ of Election Commission for the cancellation of the constituency redelineation exercise, there is no reason why MPs should be ready to become ‘scapegoats’ as well.

In fact, the Election Commission is casting aspersions on the credibility, integrity and authority of Parliament and all MPs in putting the blame of the cancellation of the constituency redelineation exercise on the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act passed by Parliament last October.

If Barisan Nasional MPs are prepared to be the ‘scapegoats’ of the Election Commission and accept blame for acting irresponsibly in legislating the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act, DAP MPs are not prepared to do so.

For this reason, DAP will propose in next month’s Parlia¬ment the establishment of a parliamentary inquiry committee to deter¬mine firstly whether there is a need for a further constitutional amendment to rectify the 1992 Constitution Amendment Act, and if so, how such a grave constitutional blunder could have been committed by the Attorney-General’s Chambers, the Cabinet as well as Parliament.