Legal Affairs Committee Enhancing Laws On Inviting President In Standing Orders

The Parliamentary Committee on Legal Affairs is enhancing two Constitution provisions on the procedure of calling President to Parliament to be clearly stipulated in Parliamentary Standing Orders.

The aim is to make comprehensive Standing Order that members can correctly refer to when calling President to Parliament to respond to their questions.

The process follows failed attempt by five legislatures who includes Leader of Opposition and President of Malawi Congress Party, Lazarus Chakwera to force President Peter Mutharika appear in the just ended Meeting of National Assembly to answer their questions as it was noted in the House that legislatures had wrongly quoted the provisions.

Deputy Chairperson for the Committee, Maxwell Thyolera explained that the committee is enhancing two Constitution provisions Section 89 (3)(c) and 89 (4) to enable legislatures to quote them correctly by clearly show in Standing Orders under which time each of the provision can be applied when calling the President. 

Both Constitution provision outlines procedures for the time the President is supposed to come to Parliament and to answer questions from members.

Under 89 (3) (c) it is mandatory that before the House consider budget, the president should come to answer questions and policies of Government. And therefore, where the president is required to respond to questions in accordance with the provisions of Section 89 (3) (c) of the Constitution, he or she may not delegate such functions to a member of the Cabinet. While section 89 (4) President can be summoned at any time by the motion of the House, however, during that time President can delegate a Cabinet Minister. 

But during the just ended 3rd Meeting of the 46 Session of National Assembly both constitutional provisions were interchangeably used by members when calling the President and this is why members had insisted to see President in the House and not delegated Minister yet this was not a period that was mandatory for the Parliament to invite the President. 

“During other meetings the president can be summoned by the resolution of the House. So, under that constitution provision there was no any standing order to support that and this is why during the last meeting there were some problems where others were confusing the two provisions because the other one was operationalised  by the standing order 70 while the second on section 89 (4) was not operationalized.” noted Thyolera

“So what we are doing now, is to operationalise both sections section 89 (3) (c) and 89 (4) so that may be things could go on smoothly the president should be called to Parliament when need be.” He added

He then urged Presidents to comply to these two constitutional provisions “This is a constitutional provision and the president before assuming the office is sworn to defend the constitution and is a custodian of the constitution. So, it is our expectation that the constitution will be respected in that respect.”

He also added that the committee has proposed inclusion in the new provision in the standing order 67 so that members can be free to ask five questions and five supplementary questions. Another section 89 (4) the similar procedure of allowing members to ask five questions and five supplementary questions will apply. And we are proposing to invite President on Wednesdays for one and a half hour session”