MP SPEAKS | During the objection hearings to the new voters being transferred to Segamat’s still unbuilt army camp, an Election Commission (EC) registrar had rejected the Parliament Hansard as evidence, saying that it “cannot be believed”.

The objections are being raised in regards to the inclusion of 1,079 new army voters in the Segamat constituency as listed in the EC’s third quarter supplementary electoral roll. The ongoing issue had been raised by Kluang MP Liew Chin Tong because the new army camp in Segamat is not even complete, but the army personnel and their spouses have already been added to the electoral roll in that constituency.

During the budget debate in Parliament on Nov 27, Seremban MP Anthony Loke asked for confirmation if the army camp was still under construction or if it had been completed.

In response, Deputy Minister of Defence Johari Baharum said that the camp was still under construction and when questioned further, he said that the camp was not complete. As recorded on page 136 of the Hansard, the deputy minister said “belum siap” (hasn't been completed) when asked to confirm the status of the army camp.

Yet, the registrar chose to reject the Hansard as evidence. This is a clear case of contempt against Parliament.

The Parliament Hansard is the official record of parliamentary proceedings. Even in court, parliamentary proceedings are admissible as evidence. Section 78 (1b) of the Evidence Act 1950, which states the proof required for official documents, states that:

“…the proceedings of Parliament or of any of the federal legislatures that existed in Malaysia before Parliament was constituted or of the legislature of any State— by the minutes of the body or by the published Acts of parliament, ordinances, enactments or abstracts or by copies purporting to be printed by the authority of the government concerned.”

The Act clearly says that parliamentary proceedings are proved by the minutes of the session, which takes the form of the parliamentary Hansard and nothing else.

Parliament cannot be believed?

If the judiciary accepts the Hansard as hard evidence, who is the EC to reject the official parliamentary document? For the EC registrar to say that the Hansard cannot be believed, they are saying that parliament proceedings themselves cannot be believed.

We call upon the speaker Pandikar Amin to reprimand the EC for the latter’s contempt, and we call upon the EC to reprimand the responsible registrar and immediately act to rectify the injustice by reopening the objection proceedings in Segamat.

The failure of the EC to do the above would only further prove that the EC is not the independent institution conceived by our constitution. Instead, it would be seen as merely a pawn.

TONY PUA is Petaling Jaya Utara MP and DAP national publicity secretary.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.