Kick Start With Youth Parliament

I believe there are number of you are unaware of the existence of Youth Parliament in United Kingdom, a parliamentary democracy system which our country should look forward and nevertheless to take a lead in enhancing the democracy education policy among the youth.

UK Youth Parliament is just like a real Parliamentary system, a system which involving a campaigning and voting process. In order to become an eligible Member of Youth Parliament (MYP), he must be a resident of UK and aged between 11 and 18 years old. The voters are also the same category of youth as specified herein.

The MYPs have the opportunity to sit in the House of Commons (in our context it is refer to the "Dewan Rakyat") to debate issues that relate to the youth society across the UK, including Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales. The constituency is divided according to the number of Local Education Authority (LEA). Each LEA represents a Youth Parliament Constituency.

There are over 250 MYPs in UK presently.

Since the Youth Parliament is given mandate by the UK government in terms of legality and legitimacy, the MYPs do enjoyed certain privileges as the "real MPs". During the term of office the MYP which represent his own constituency will have opportunities to meet the MP and discuss any issues or campaigns in relation to the constituency.

The most powerful feature of the Youth Parliament is the House of Commons Debate. The MYPs will sit in the House of Commons and debate 4 issues which will be voted by the youth through ballot box and additional 1 issue which is reserved for the Youth Parliament to decide on. Such broad system could ensure the participation of the youth within the country.

Further to that, there are numerous advantages arise from such system and nevertheless could crystallize the demands of the youth society into a focused atmosphere, if our country taking into consideration in implementing it:-

a) Enhancing Participatory Democracy

In Malaysia we have to be at least 21 years old and/or above to exercise our right through the ballot box, as provided under Article 119 Federal Constitution. In short, a Youth Parliament system would enable and empower the "underage" youth to enjoy a voting right. Going further, the youth will be getting a vital participation within the country's democracy system.

b) Sharpening Sensitivity on National Issues

A reflection from the UK Youth Parliament system has shown us the youth would need to identify and vote for the issues to be carried right to the House of Commons by the MYPs. Voters are one of the sources of democracy power and certainly they will vote for those issues in which are relate to them personally and even to the country. Thus, the youth will be "trained" in an indirect method under such system to identify those important issues and possibly takes further step to undertake personal research.

c) Creating Greater Constitutionalism

Despite the fact that the UK does not has a codified Constitution, we should be glad and proud to have a set of codified supreme law of the land to govern our country, instead of keep pointing all conflicts to the parliamentary supremacy. A well developed Youth Parliament system will create better awareness of  Constitutionalism among the youth, regardless of the secular-islamic issue that has been politicized by the politicians, as an example. The youth will get to know further on how the separation of powers function governed under the Constitution, including the legislator (parliament) role and its power when they participate within this context.

It is worth to note the Ministry of Youth and Sports has actually initiated the implementation of youth parliament this year (2012) and the first sitting trial has took place in Palace of Golden Horses, Seri Kembangan. Although the members were selected based on self-registration or recommendation by political parties or NGOs, I wouldn't comment much on it due to its fresh starting but the government would need to give more mandate to the youth parliament but not use it as a tool for own propaganda.

A healthy nation democracy system could kick start with a youth parliament, where all the participants are the prospective voters and country leaders sooner or later. Let the youth learn how to in charge of their own country's democracy and I hope we could transform from representative democracy into direct participatory democracy someday!

狡辩废除内安法令

我国独立至今，仍然保留旧时代且不符合法治精神的法令。这些法令，大体上虽将不影响一般普罗大众的生活作息，但一般民众却必须对这些不符合时宜的法令了解，并且通过民主程序传达心中的意愿，包括撤换政府。其中〈1960年内安法令〉与〈1948年煽动法令〉是较为偏离法治精神的法令，因为这些法令只有“法制”而没有“法治”。

根据〈1960年内安法令〉，内政部（或警察）有权以有理由相信任何人士在危害国家安全的情况下，不需要法庭逮捕令即可进行扣留。扣留期限长达60天，而在内政部长的授权下可继续扣留无限期，剥削基本自由权。在内安法令的扣留下，有关嫌犯并未享有正常的司法审讯程序，进而失去宪法底下所赋予的自由权。

废除内安法令已沦为成朝野政党的角力点，变相成为一项政治工具。在野的极力通过废除声拉取选民，在朝的碍于为了自打嘴巴，即使有一万个不愿意也得为内安法令进行捍卫。当然，也有一些较为中立的就提倡修改法令，也有些则倡议以其他法令替代，各有各说。

内安法令最具争议性的地方，是嫌犯未能经过合法的司法审讯，以及可在内政部长的个人授权底下，进行无限期扣押。我国宪法底下赋予的人生基本自由权，与内安法令抵触（contrast），理应当内政部援引内安法令进行扣押时，是超越所赋予的权力（acting ultra virus）。但由于三权体制败坏，所以未能对使用此项法令的执法当局进行任何对付或纠正行动。

其实，无论是修改或废除，都必须符合法治与司法精神。不幸的是，在朝政府并无意进行修改，在野的则利用政治机会攻击。无论怎样，在提倡，遵守和捍卫法律前人人平等的主义时，此项法令在政治局势的演变下，似乎已走进不得不废的地步。

Seputeh国会议员郭素沁与星洲日报记者在此法令下被逮捕就是最好的证据。当此项法令在国会进行辩论之际，当时在任的首相亦非常清楚交代，内安法令的存在是为了对付马共武装份子，而非一般贫民百姓。延续至今，无可否认内安法令的出发点无异议，即维护国家安全。只是，法令其当初存在的意义和本身不符合现今社会精神才是问题所在。

倘若在朝政府有意进行修正，可通过国会进行修法，想必在野议员也会大力赞同。在朝政府执意保留的法令虽然有其政治考量之处，但不能为了“以法治国”而保留失去人性的法令。内安法令与其他过去式的法令，其修正或废除势在必行。