00:00 [Question in Indonesian]
00:04 [Question in Indonesian]
00:08 [Question in Indonesian]
00:12 [Question in Indonesian]
00:16 [Question in Indonesian]
00:20 [Question in Indonesian]
00:24 [Question in Indonesian]
00:28 [Question in Indonesian]
00:32 [Question in Indonesian]
00:36 [Question in Indonesian]
00:40 [Question in Indonesian]
00:44 [Question in Indonesian]
00:48 [Question in Indonesian]
00:52 [Question in Indonesian]
00:56 [Question in Indonesian]
01:00 [Question in Indonesian]
01:04 [Question in Indonesian]
01:08 [Question in Indonesian]
01:12 [Question in Indonesian]
01:16 [Question in Indonesian]
01:20 [Question in Indonesian]
01:25 Thank you, my second brother.
01:27 This is how I want to answer.
01:31 The reason why the State Council or the State Council
01:36 has made a decision on the 4th of this month
01:39 is that today is the State Council's anniversary.
01:42 Actually, I want to say here, Mr. Speaker,
01:46 I cannot answer the justification of the State Council
01:49 because I mentioned it in the statement.
01:51 There is nothing in this institution,
01:54 in this 145,
01:57 that states that the power of the State Council
02:01 and the State Council must report to the Cabinet Minister
02:06 or the Prime Minister.
02:07 There is nothing.
02:08 So I cannot answer for them.
02:10 Because the State Council that I mentioned earlier,
02:12 I hold on to the foundation of the word State Council,
02:15 this State Council is a State Council that is given by the institution
02:18 where it can make a statement and draw a judgment.
02:20 That is its right in the institution.
02:22 Until today, we in this Parliament agree to make a move to the institution
02:27 to determine what is actually bearable.
02:31 Some say it's a monetary system, some say it's a political case.
02:34 It can be.
02:35 Some say it's a case. I don't know.
02:36 That's why the State Council,
02:38 which respects my colleagues over there as experts,
02:43 we put it in two task forces,
02:46 which are empirical study and regulation,
02:52 to re-evaluate.
02:53 I want to be clear before I answer my second colleague's question.
02:56 He was once a Minister of Law.
02:59 He knows.
03:00 I believe that the people of Kota Baru are more experts than me.
03:03 But maybe because he's my colleague, he forgot.
03:05 Or he made it so he forgot.
03:06 But there's no problem.
03:07 I can tell you.
03:08 Answer.
03:09 With permission.
03:10 Yes.
03:11 Is it working? It's not finished yet.
03:13 I'll take you out for coffee.
03:15 My poor brother.
03:16 Let's go, brother.
03:17 My brother is waiting.
03:18 Don't be late.
03:19 When we want to do the reading of the empirical study,
03:28 I actually mentioned one year,
03:30 but the State Council told me they wanted one plus one, two years.
03:34 The reason is,
03:35 like what happened in the Parliament Services Act,
03:38 all Parliament officials don't want open service.
03:42 They don't want closed service.
03:45 They want open service.
03:46 That they can transfer to other government agencies.
03:48 The people behind me,
03:50 with their fierce faces,
03:51 they are Judicial Legal Services.
03:53 They don't want to be just a lawyer.
03:57 They want to have experience as a judge,
04:00 session squad judge, magistrate judge,
04:03 and most importantly,
04:04 to be an advisor to the government.
04:06 Because this experience will give them a great career.
04:10 So I think the government wants to be fair.
04:15 We won't force them.
04:16 We'll listen to their orders.
04:18 So I want to give my second answer.
04:20 Format in the United Kingdom.
04:22 The United Kingdom's lawyers are not politicians.
04:27 They have their own laws.
04:28 Because they want to determine that the lawyers,
04:31 in carrying out the power of the law,
04:33 they are the power of the law that is controlled.
04:36 Even though they have their own arguments,
04:38 but the arguments are controlled.
04:41 Then we have the system that is happening in Australia.
04:47 The Australian lawyer can also be the front bench,
04:51 cabinet minister.
04:52 And this is what happens when we remember,
04:55 I've mentioned this many times,
04:56 we had Minister Amno,
04:58 late Minister Hamzah,
05:00 late Minister Abu Qadir,
05:04 late Minister Tan Sri,
05:06 two cabinet ministers from the front bench.
05:09 If today, the minister decides that we,
05:14 one of us, maybe me,
05:16 become a state lawyer,
05:18 the power that I have,
05:20 I'm not only advising the government,
05:22 but also determining the law,
05:24 so when the people over there say,
05:26 this is the intention of selective prosecution,
05:29 it's possible.
05:31 Because politicians, it's possible.
05:33 But because today,
05:35 what is determined in our government today,
05:38 we, who hold the front bench position,
05:42 or the 15 people over there,
05:43 don't become state lawyers,
05:45 because the power that we have is so big.
05:48 That's why I've said this before,
05:50 separation is mandatory and reasonable.
05:53 But today, the government says that
05:57 separation of power is reasonable,
05:59 but it needs to be studied.
06:02 Separation of power is mandatory,
06:05 it needs to be discussed in the parliament,
06:07 because the parliament will decide
06:09 under the constitution,
06:10 to change the law,
06:13 or give a new interpretation,
06:15 or make a change,
06:17 because the one who decides,
06:19 the one who decides on the 7th law,
06:22 the justice system in our country,
06:24 is us, as the parliament.
06:26 That's why here,
06:27 the constitution is 148.
06:30 If we want to get 148,
06:32 I'm a reformist, I want to do everything.
06:35 Suddenly, 148, then 147.
06:38 How am I going to get it?
06:40 Tomorrow, someone will be invited,
06:41 to love each other, 7, 8, 9, 10.
06:44 How can we be a reformist,
06:47 if the parliament is unstable,
06:49 because the government can't make changes to the constitution?
06:52 I don't know, maybe my friend over there,
06:54 my brother, number one,
06:55 my brother, number two,
06:56 will give a commitment.
06:57 We will give consent
06:59 to change the constitution.
07:01 That's what he said, it's possible.
07:02 But I don't know if it's possible or not.
07:04 But to do justice, we need to do justice.
07:06 Third,
07:07 the one you asked me,
07:08 will the minister's representative answer?
07:11 Your body is here.
07:14 I'm not a representative,
07:15 he did good, so he answered.
07:17 Tomorrow, God willing,
07:18 2.5 to 3.5.
07:20 So those questions,
07:21 maybe you can ask.
07:22 But the commitment from us,
07:24 the government today,
07:25 we will determine,
07:27 that we need to be fair.
07:29 So that we can do this study.
07:31 And I believe that,
07:32 in our power,
07:34 we have my colleagues,
07:35 Mr. Ram Kapal Singh,
07:36 Mr. William Leong from Selayang,
07:39 Mr. Sani Izvaren,
07:41 Reyan from Jurutong,
07:44 Dato' Wira Masih Menyati
07:46 from Masjid Tanah,
07:48 then we have with us
07:50 Mr. Mohamad Zulkifli,
07:52 from Besut,
07:53 and also representatives from the State Department,
07:56 from the Legislative Yuan,
07:58 from the Suranjaya,
07:59 the Ministry of Justice and Law,
08:01 SPKP,
08:03 Ministry of Finance,
08:05 Ministry of Finance and Ministry of Public Services.
08:07 Mr. Speaker,
08:09 if we succeed in making a move
08:11 to the Parliamentary Services Act,
08:13 we also need 2/3 votes from the parliament.
08:18 But the implementation,
08:20 Mr. Speaker,
08:23 will take time,
08:25 between 2 to 3 years.
08:27 It means all the laws,
08:29 the move to the government institutions,
08:32 at this high level,
08:33 will take time.
08:34 So,
08:35 wait a minute,
08:37 I will try my best
08:40 to give a written answer,
08:42 but I want to clarify here,
08:43 as I said,
08:45 we are a government,
08:46 our hashtag is #WeWalkTheTalk.
08:48 We are not #WeDontTalk
08:51 and #WeDontWalk.
08:52 With that,
08:53 I thank you, Mr. Speaker.
08:55 [End]
08:58 [End]
08:59 [End]
09:01 [End]
09:02 [BLANK_AUDIO]
Comments