Pour la deuxième fois en huit jours, la Speaker de l’Assemblée nationale, Shirin Aumeeruddy Cziffra, a dû formuler un Ruling pour donner son interprétation des Standing Orders dans des cas précis. La première fois était dans le cadre d’une PNQ du leader de l’opposition, Joe Lesjongard, au cours de laquelle une liste de noms des personnes recrutées avait été soumise à la Chambre, laquelle avait, par la suite, été retournée au leader de l’opposition. Cette fois, c’était au tour d’une interpellation adressée par Joanna Bérenger au ministre Reza Uteem concernant un Carer. Question qui a donné lieu à de vives altercations.
La question avait été inspirée d’un article de presse et le ministre Shakeel Mohamed avait, à un certain moment, demandé à la Speaker si c’était conforme aux Standing Orders. La Speaker avait promis de faire une déclaration à ce sujet. « I’m once more appealing to all honourable members, on whichever side of the house you may be sitting, to please respect the standing orders and help me to uphold the dignity of our Parliament. You have the duty, of course, to fight for your ideas, but please do so with respect for your opponents, but also for all those watching you on Parliament TV », a-t-elle fait comprendre. Elle dira à ce propos :
« Supplementary question for her parliamentary question B805, on which I decided to give a ruling. I have just read the uncorrected transcript of the answer so that I may be properly guided in delivering my ruling. I refer honourable members to standing order 22-1, which refers to the rules concerning parliamentary questions, including supplementary questions.
Standing orders 22-1H, which I partly referred to recently, reads, a question shall not include the name of persons or statements of facts, unless they are necessary to make the question intelligible, and if the case of statement of facts can be authenticated by the member concerned, nor shall it contain charges which the member asking the question is not prepared to substantiate. Standing order 1I, small i, a question shall not contain any arguments, expressions of opinion, inferences, imputations, quotations, extracts from newspapers and periodicals, epithets, or controversial, ironical, or offensive expressions or hypothetical cases. In the same vein, I also refer to standing order 1, still, but this time small l, which was not totally the case this morning, but again, refers to statements in the press, and reads as follows.
It will stand as a guideline, as recently there was such a question regarding express during the P&Q. A question shall not be asked, I’m quoting, a question shall not be asked whether statements in the press or of private individuals or unofficial bodies are accurate. Members, I also wish to draw your attention to standing order 22.5. A question shall not be made a pretext for a debate.
I have noted that of late, this has often been the case. Members tend to make statements rather than put questions. Sometimes I’m lenient. I’m once more appealing to all honourable members, on whichever side of the house you may be sitting, to please respect the standing orders and help me to uphold the dignity of our Parliament. You have the duty, of course, to fight for your ideas, but please do so with respect for your opponents, but also for all those watching you on Parliament TV. »
