This letter misses one vital thing... Yes one vital thing which begins with and ends with where does the speaker of the House sources his jurisdiction, and from which House rules mandates him to alienate more than 80% of the MPs from carrying out their onus?
My contextualization of the letter convinces me to take lack of citation of the House rule in this letter empowering the Speaker of the house to alienate almost 80% of MPs and distort beyond recognition the opposition percentage representation suggest a determination to pass through a very unpopular budget on election year..
Best way was to instruct all MPs to relay their contributions and budgetary adjustments be done then a voicemail vote but to reduce constitutional representation with speaker own decision smacks of an illegality on the face of democratic institution
Another way was to modify the House rules through voicemail votes to empower creation of another layer of representation to represent the alienated MPs... Which is tolerable than this speaker fiat who is exploiting a crisis to hijack more powers to himself and his party who now will distort the constitutional representation of the House in this budgetary process... Everything looks illegal must suggest
Now CCM representation which in a normal parliament will be hovering around sixty percent but now under the Speaker own made rule will snowball to almost 93%!
Is this democracy at work or mobocracy replacing it?
Sent using
Jamii Forums mobile app