A spoken inquiry from lawmaker Au Kam San at the Legislative Assembly (AL), during the period before the agenda, was interrupted by protest from lawmaker Chui Sai Peng, who claimed that the content of the inquiry violated both the Basic Law and the statute of the lawmakers.
In his speech, Au expressed a different opinion from that of the police regarding the organization and purpose of the annual vigil of June 4: an event which provided evidence that the Electoral Affairs Committee (CAEAL) considered in the disqualification of some of the candidates in this year’s AL elections.
Chui protested, saying that by now Au should know full well what opinion and what conclusions the National People’s Congress of the People’s Republic of China has formed on this incident, claiming that under national sovereignty, Macau and all lawmakers must respect their decision.
Chui also rejected Au’s remarks about the decisions by CAEAL and by the Court of Final Appeal (TUI) on the matter.
The protest also prompted an intervention from the AL president, Kou Hoi In, who said that he had already spoken to Au about the content of his inquiry and, like Chui, claimed that the June 4 incident in Tiananmen Square, Beijing had already been the subject of a report and a statement from the central government which should not be questioned.
“Your speech violates the decision of the central government of the country. CAEAL disqualified the candidates and the TUI [has] already issued a final ruling on this matter. Of course, you can have a different opinion [and] disagree with this, but in your speech, you criticized the CAEAL and also the decision [by TUI],” Kou told Au.
Lawmaker Vong Hin Fai also intervened in the matter. Vong claimed that Au’s speech violated Article 61 of the regimen of the AL and Article 38 of the statute of the lawmakers, which define the duties of the lawmaker. “The intervention of lawmaker Au Kam San does not comply with the Basic Law, namely Article 12,” Vong added.
Kou concluded by remarking that Au did not want to accept his advice and insisted on delivering this speech, a reason which justified his decision to stop Au from continuing the inquiry.
Earlier, making similar accusations, another lawmaker, Ip Sio Kai had also interrupted the session after the delivery of another spoken inquiry by lawmaker Sulu Sou.
Ip denounced what he said was an attempt by Sou to devalue the position of the indirectly elected lawmakers.
“Indirectly elected lawmakers assume the same duties and have the same power as appointed ones and the directly elected [ones],” he said, adding, “Lawmaker Sulu Sou looks like he is depreciating the lawmakers [elected] by indirect suffrage,” Ip remarked.
Ip also added that Sou’s claim that the disqualification of some lists of candidates by CAEAL amounts to a lack of democracy is causing misunderstanding within the population.
During the period before the agenda several other lawmakers, namely Davis Fong, Ma Chi Seng, Chan Wa Keong, Pang Chuan, Iau Teng Pio, and Lao Chi Ngai submitted inquiries supporting the decision of both CAEAL and TUI on the case, reaffirming the need to ensure that “Macau is governed by patriots.”
No Comments