Naquib Hussin was looking for a job. He went for an interview and promoted himself with ideas he wants to share and grow with the company. The company who is going to be his paymaster needed to match its vision and mission with his proposals.

Through sheer determination, Naquib was successful and was employed. His remuneration package is very good and comes with a pension. For the first few years he delivered some of the promises he made during the interview. This matched pretty well with the needs and wants of his paymaster. Along the way he got promoted. After warming his seat, he started to focus and do things that are not primary to his job functions.

Naquib was missing from meetings and had excuses not to attend. Among them are official overseas trips, official launching ceremonies, attending to other businesses, etc. More often, his deputy has to carry his burden. But meeting dates have been scheduled earlier for planning purposes. On top of that, his ideas are now veering away from the needs and wants of his paymaster.

What do you think the paymaster should do?

Under normal circumstances disciplinary action would have been instituted .

Now, take that example in the context of the rakyat being the paymaster and Naquib as the ‘wakil rakyat’ or minister. This is in relation to a request to allow the Dewan Negara to summon ministers instead of just sending their deputies to respond to the Upper House.

Are there avenues for the paymaster/rakyat to take disciplinary actions on Naquib? Isn’t he acting like the ‘boss’ now? The former has to wait for five years or the next general election to sack him if he continues with his new ways.

I am inclined not to point a finger only at Naquib but towards the systems, too.

In 2003, the then-Dewan Negara president, Abdul Hamid Pawanteh, pledged to change the general public image of the Dewan Negara as a ‘rubber stamp’. It was said that the Dewan Negara accommodates some political rejects and deadwood.

The intent of the original constitution which provided for only 16 senators to be appointed by the Agong, was for the Dewan Negara to act as a check on the Dewan Rakyat and represent the interests of the various states.

‘Spirit of the original constitution’

However, subsequent amendments have, according to former lord president of the Federal Court, the late Mohamed Suffian Mohamed Hashim, acted “contrary to the spirit of the original constitution which established the Dewan Negara specially as a body to protect in the federal Parliament, state interests against federal encroachments”.

On the present request, the Dewan Negara president said it is still in planning and discussion and we cannot tie up the ministers unless it is important. A minister said any suggestion to improve must be made officially in writing.

I beg to differ.

Firstly, as a ‘wakil rakyat’, what are the functions and responsibilities of the ministers/cabinet? Secondly, the ministers/cabinet is the executive branch who are accountable collectively to the Parliament. Thirdly, do not forget that deputy ministers are not included in the cabinet. Then, has one forgotten about the oath based on Article 59 (1) of the Federal Constitution before taking up the post. Last but not least, ministers are mostly appointed from the lower house.

It says a lot if the Upper House needs to make the request officially in writing to the lower house It is akin to asking the immediate boss to put in writing his/her instructions to a subordinate.

One has also to see that the dates for Dewan Rakyat and Dewan Negara sittings are scheduled earlier. This would allow ministers to manage and plan their schedules. The rakyat would expect the ministers, with all the supporting staff, to give priority to Dewan Negara sittings. It also shows the level of importance one puts on the Upper House.

As for the Dewan Negara itself, we have heard of its president chiding senators, too, for not attending Dewan Negara sittings. In his last sitting before his tenure ends in April 2016, the former president, Abu Zahar Ujang, wanted to ensure that the sanctity of the upper house is respected.

I worry when constitutional scholar Emeritus Professor Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi concluded that “the legislative process is basically an executive process, not a parliamentary process”. I was told, based on the constitution of Malaysia, the government is accountable to Parliament. However, there have been substantial controversies over the independence of the Malaysian Parliament.

As I see it, the late Mohamed Suffian was absolutely correct and Abu Zahar’s wish will just be a dream.

For a start, to put things in place, I think we should start calling Ahli Dewan Rakyat as ‘Wakil Rakyat’.

What say you...