The Role of the People in Post Legislative Scrutiny: Perspectives from Malaysia and Australia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32890/jis2020.16.1Keywords:
post legislative scrutiny, bottom-up approach, Australia, MalaysiaAbstract
The purpose of this article is to critically examine the role of the people in the process of reviewing the implementation and effectiveness of existing laws, described in the emerging literature as ‘post-legislative scrutiny or ‘PLS’. Examining the options for citizen engagement with legislative review is critical for all parliamentary democracies grappling with the challenge of rebuilding trust between citizens and institutions. This is because reviewing the content and purpose of proposed and the implementation and impact of existing laws is a way for parliamentarians to give effect to their democratic promise. The methodology employed is qualitative in nature with a tiered approached to identifying and examining the extent to which individuals and non-government actors can contribute to parliamentary review processes in two Westminster-inspired parliamentary democracies: Australia and Malaysia. Using case study examples and examining both structural and cultural features of the systems of legislative review in both systems, this article directly challenges some of the assumptions previously associated with PLS in the existing literature. Experiences of different ‘ad hoc’ forms of PLS in both Australia and Malaysia suggest that there could be substantial benefits for lawmakers and citizens by moving toward a more deliberative, ‘bottom up’ approach to PLS in the future.
References
Abdullah, M. C. (2019, March 14). Time for parliamentary reform. The Sun Daily. Retrieved from https://www.thesundaily.my/opinion/time-for-parliamentary-reformGM680923 Appleby, G., Reilly, A., & Grenfell, L. Australian Public Law (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 3rd ed, 2019) 169-171.
Aris, N. A. (2019, February 18). Senator wants Parliamentary Services Act restored for greater parliamentary autonomy. Free Malaysia Today. Retrieved from https://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2019/02/18/reforms-committee-chiefwants-parliamentary-services-act-1963-restored/
Banfield, A.C., & Knopff R. (2009). Legislative versus judicial checks and balances: Comparing rights policies across regimes. Australian Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 13-27.
Beetham, D. (2002). The Legitimation of Power. London: Palgrave.
Bennett, S. (2004). The Australian senate. Research Paper No 6, Parliamentary Library, Parliament of Australia. Retrieved from <https://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/ Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs>. Accessed 8 Jan 2020.
Benton, M., & Russell, M. (2013). Assessing the impact of parliamentary oversight committees: The select committees in the British House of Commons, Parliamentary Affairs, 66(4), 772-797.
Buchanan, A. (2002). Political legitimacy and democracy. Ethics, 112(4), 689-719.
Calpinska, L. (2006). Post-legislative scrutiny of acts of parliament. Commonwealth Law Bulletin, 32(2), 191-204.
Cassey Lee (2018). Making Sense of Malaysia’s Institutional Reforms, No 79, ISEAS: Singapore.
Caygill, T. (2019). Legislation under review: An assessment of post legislative scrutiny recommendations in the UK parliament. Journal of Legislative Studies, 25(2), 295313. Ying Hooi Khoo & Sarah Moulds
De Vrieze, F. (2018) Principles of Post-Legislative Scrutiny by Parliaments (2018, Westminster Foundation for Democracy, London). Retrieved from . Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
De Vrieze, F., & Hasson, V. (2018). Post Legislative Scrutiny: Comparative Practices of Post-Legislative Scrutiny in Selected Parliaments and the Rationale for its Place in Democracy Assistance (Westminster Foundation for Democracy, London). Retrieved from <https://www.wfd.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Comparative-Study-PLSWEB.pdf>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Edelman, R. (2017). Executive Summary, 2017 Edelman Trust Barometer, (online) January 15, 2017, Retrieved from <https://www.edelman.com/research/2017-edelman-trustbarometer>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Editorial. (2006). Post-legislative scrutiny. Statute Law Review, 27(2), iii-vi.
Elster, J. (1998). Introduction. In J. Elster (Ed.), Deliberative democracy (pp. 1-18). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Evans, C., & Evans S. (2006). Legislative scrutiny committees and parliamentary conceptions of human rights. Public Law, 785-806.
French, R. (2017). Law making in a representative democracy: The durability of enduring values. Flinders Law Journal, 19(1), 19-36.
Fukuyama, F. (2015). Why is democracy performing so poorly? Journal of Democracy, 26(1), 11-20.
Gleeson, M. (2001). The shape of representative democracy. Monash University Law Review, 27(1), 1-11.
Grenfell, L. (2015). An Australian spectrum of political rights scrutiny: Continuing to lead by example? Public Law Review, 26(1), 19-38.
Grenfell, L., & Moulds, S. (2018). The role of committees in rights protection in federal and state parliaments in Australia. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 41(1), 40-79.
Griffith, G. (2005). Parliament and accountability: The role of parliamentary oversight committees. Briefing Paper No 12/05, Parliamentary Library Research Service, New South Wales. Retrieved from <https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/researchpapers/ Documents/parliament-and-accountability-the-role-of-parlia/Parliament% and%20Accountability%20BRIEFING%20Paper%20and%20INDEX.pdf>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Gulati, R., McGarrity N., & Williams G. (2012). Sunset clauses in Australian anti-terror laws. Adelaide Law Review, 33, 307-333.
Gutmann, A., & Thompson, D. F. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Habermas, J. (1995). Reconciliation through the public use of reason: Remarks on John Rawls’s political liberalism. The Journal of Philosophy, 92(3), 109-131.
Halligan, J. (2008). Parliamentary committee roles in facilitating public policy at the Commonwealth level. Australasian Parliamentary Review, 23(2), 135-156.
Jaensch, D. (2011). Democratic representation: Then, now, and in the future. Flinders Journal of History and Politics, 27, 26-34. Perspectives from Malaysia and Australia
Kant, I. (1996). The Cambridge edition of the works of Immanuel Kant: Practical philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kavanagh, A. (2015). The joint committee on human rights: A hybrid breed of constitutional watchdog. In M. Hunt, H. J. Hooper & P. Yowell (Eds.), Parliaments and human rights: Redressing the democratic deficit (111-134). Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Kinley, D. (1999). Parliamentary scrutiny of human rights: A duty neglected. In P. Alston (Ed.), Promoting human rights through bills of rights: Comparative perspectives (158-172). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kinley, D., & Ernst, C. (2012). Exile on main street: Australia’s legislative agenda for human rights. European Human Rights Law Review, 1, 58-70.
Knight, J., & Johnson, J. (1994). Aggregation and deliberation: On the possibility of democratic legitimacy. Political Theory, 22(2), 277-296.
Koziol. M., & Political reporter. (2017, January 21). Distrustful nation: Australians lose faith in politics, media and business. The Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/distrustful-nation-australians-lose-faith-inpolitics-media-and-business-20170118-gttmpd.html
Larkin, P., Hindmoor A., & Kennon A. (2009). Assessing the influence of select committees in the UK: The education and skills committee 1997–2005. Journal of Legislative Studies, 15(1), 71-89.
Law Commission of England and Wales (2006) Post legislative scrutiny (October 2006) Cm 6945. Retrieved from <http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/app/uploads/2015/03/lc302_ Post-legislative_Scrutiny.pdf>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Law Commission of England and Wales, (2005). Ninth Programme of Law Reform (Law Com No 293). Retrieved from < https://s3-eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/lawcom-prodstorage-11jsxou24uy7q/uploads/2015/03/lc293_9th_Programme.pdf>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Levy, R., & Orr, G. (2016). The law of deliberative democracy. London: Routledge.
Levy, R., Kong H., Orr, G., & King J. (Eds.). (2018). The Cambridge handbook of deliberative constitutionalism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Liebenberg, S. (2018). Participatory justice in social rights adjudication. Human Rights Law Review, 18(4), 623-649.
Malaysian Economic Association. (2017). MEA proposal: Enhancing parliamentary committees in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: Malaysian Economic Association, Faculty of Economics & Administration, University of Malaya.
Manin, B. (1987). On legitimacy and political deliberation. Political Theory, 15(3), 338368.
Marinac, A. (2003). The Usual Suspects? Civil Society and Senate Committees. Papers on Parliament No 42. Canberra: Parliament of Australia, Canberra. Retrieved from <https://www.aph.gov.au/sitecore/content/Home/About_Parliament/Senate/Powers_ practice_n_procedures/pops/pop42/~/link.aspx?_id=1AF5557C98A84D45A0ACC B0E6C36945D>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Mashaw, J. L. (1981). Administrative due process: The quest for a dignitary theory. Boston University Law Review, 61, 885-931. Ying Hooi Khoo & Sarah Moulds
Mauzy, D. K. (2006). The challenge to democracy: Singapore’s and Malaysia’s resilient hybrid regimes. Taiwan Journal of Democracy, 2(2), 47-68.
Means, G. P. (1996). Soft authoritarianism in Malaysia and Singapore. Journal of Democracy, 7(4), 103-117. Mohd Hishamudin Yunus, Parliamentary select committees. In Legal Herald (December 2016), Lee Hishammuddin Allen & Gledhill. Online <https://www.lh-ag.com/wpcontent/uploads/2017/01/7828_Legal-Heral-Dec_v3.pdf >
Moulds, S. (2016). Committees of influence: Parliamentary committees with the capacity to change Australia’s counter-terrorism laws. Australasian Parliamentary Review, 31(2), 46-66.
Moulds, S. P. (2018). The rights protecting role of parliamentary committees: The case of Australia’s counter-terrorism laws (Doctoral thesis). University of Adelaide, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.
Moulds, S. (2019). The role of Commonwealth parliamentary committees in facilitating parliamentary deliberation: A case study of marriage equality reform. In J. Debeljak & L. Grenfell (Eds.), Law making and human rights, Chapter 24, Sydney: Thomson Reuters).
Mulgan, R. (1996). The Australian senate as a ‘House of Review’. Australian Journal of Political Science, 31(2), 191-204.
Nagel, T. (1987). Moral conflict and political legitimacy. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 16(3), 215-240.
Orr, G., & Levy, R. (2016). Regulating opinion polling: A deliberative democratic perspective. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 39(1), 318-340.
Pakatan Harapan. (2018). Buku harapan: Rebuilding our nation, fulfilling our hopes. Online <http://kempen.s3.amazonaws.com/manifesto/Manifesto_text/Manifesto_PH_ EN.pdf> Parliament of Australia, House of Representatives Standing Committee on Procedure, Parliament of Australia, Building a modern committee system: An inquiry into the effectiveness of the House committee system (2010). Retrieved from < https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/House_of_Representatives_ Committees?url=proc/committees2/report.htm>.
Pettit, P. (2001). Deliberative democracy and the case for depoliticising government. University of New South Wales Law Journal, 24(3), 724-736.
Rankin, M. J. (2010). The absurdity of representation. Alternative Law Journal, 35(3), 130131.
Russell, M., & Meghan B. (2009). Assessing the policy impact of parliament: Methodological challenges and possible future approaches. Paper presented at the Public Service Association Legislative Studies Specialist Group Conference. London, United Kingdom, 24 June 2009.
Ryan, M. (2019, April 12). Can Belgium’s deliberative democracy experiment work in Australia? The Mandarin. Online <https://www.themandarin.com.au/107169-canbelgiums-deliberative-democracy-experiment-work-in-australia/>
Sedition Act to be abolished, says Liew. (2019, May 10) The Star. Online Perspectives from Malaysia and Australia
Smookler, J. (2006). Making a difference? The effectiveness of pre-legislative scrutiny. Parliamentary Affairs, 59(3), 522-535.
Stubbs, M. (2012). A brief history of the judicial review of legislation under the Australian constitution. Federal Law Review, 40(2), 227-252.
Tolley, M. C. (2009). Parliamentary scrutiny of rights in the United Kingdom: Assessing the work of the Joint Committee on Human Rights. Australian Journal of Political Science, 44(1), 41-55.
Turner, P. N. (2014). “Harm” and Mill’s Harm Principle. Ethics, 124(2), 299-326.
Vijaindren, A. (2018, August 8). Select committee, a positive progress in parliamentary reform, says C4. The New Straits Times. Online https://www.nst.com.my/news/ nation/2018/08/399440/select-committee-positive-progress-parliamentary-reformsays-c
Westminster Foundation for Democracy, (2018) London Declaration on Post-Legislative Scrutiny (online) <https://www.wfd.org/approach/post-legislative-scrutiny/>. Accessed 10 Jan 2020.
Williams, G., & Burton, L. (2015). Australia’s parliamentary scrutiny act: An exclusive parliamentary model of rights protection. In M. Hunt, H. J. Hooper & P. Yowell (Eds.), Parliaments and human rights: Redressing the democratic deficit (257-277). Oxford: Hart Publishing.
Williams, G., & Reynolds, D. (2016). The operation and impact of Australia’s parliamentary scrutiny regime for human rights. Monash University Law Review, 41(2), 469-507.
Zakaria, H. A. (1989). Malaysia: Quasi-democracy in a divided society. In L. Diamond, J. Linz & S. M. Lipset (Eds.), Democracy in developing countries: Asia (Vol.3) (pp. 347-381). Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers.
