FACULTY OF LAW

Constitutional Law 1
UCL 1612
Ministerial responsibility to Parliament is an important principle
under the parliamentary system of government.

How effectively is this doctrine operating in Malaysia?

No.

Name

Student ID

Raja Muhammad Shahreez

1142700025
Bin Raja Kamarul Zaman (L)

Tutorial
Section

Signature

T1

Chan Cindy

1142700031

T1

Maharizan Bin Mohamad

Chee

1142700032

T1

Nora Enira Binti Sahharil

1142700041

T5

Julita Junius

1142700120

T1
Received by
...........................
Gary Ng Kit Min

Abstract
This assignment is to study an application of the Ministerial responsibility to
Parliament and its principle under the parliamentary system of a government in Malaysia.
Ministerial responsibility is a type of constitutional convention using the British
parliamentary system, known as Westminster system. The minister or the members of the
cabinet bears the full consequences or responsibility of their own department actions. Usually
the countries that practice this system practice the federal constitutional monarchy.
There are two types of ministerial responsibility being discussed in this assignment;
individual responsibility and collective cabinet responsibility. The definition of the ministerial
responsibility will be explained throughout the assignment. The purpose of studying this
topic is to test the theory of the parliamentary system and the role of the minister in Malaysia.
Examples of the real life experience are given to support the application of the theory. It is
hoped that this assignment will help Malaysian to gain a better understanding on the concept
of the ministerial responsibility.

Table of Content
TOPICS

CHAPTER
Chapter 1

Chapter 2

Chapter 3

Chapter 4

Chapter 5

Chapter 6

Introduction
Individual Ministerial Responsibility
2.0 Individual Ministerial Responsibility
2.1 Policy Culpability
2.2 Vicarious Liability
2.3 Responsibility for Monarchs Acts
2.4 Legislation
2.5 Vote of Censure
2.6 The Real Life Examples of Individual Responsibility
Collective Cabinet Ministerial Responsibility
3.0 Collective Ministerial Responsibility
3.1 Parliamentary Executive
3.2 Unanimity
3.3 Maintaining Confidence
3.4 Secrecy
3.5 Answerable To Monarch
3.6 The Real Life Examples of Collective Cabinet
Responsibility
Concept of Ministerial Responsibility in Malaysia
4.0 Practice of Ministerial Responsibility in Malaysia
4.1 Moral Duty of the Ministers
4.2 Refusal to Answer During Question Time
4.3 Ministers Responsibility on Behalf of Civil Servants
Action
4.4 Maintaining the Confidence of the Lower House
4.5 Unanimity in Malaysia Parliament
4.6 Executive Branch Usurpation of Power
Recommendations and Guidelines Towards Ministerial
Responsibility
5.0 What Can Be Done?
5.1 Increasing the Power of the Parliament
5.2 The Role of the Press and Media
5.3 Increasing the Oppositions Strength
5.4 Limit the Power of Prime Minister
5.5 Public Opinion
Conclusion
References
Appendixes

PAGES
1-2

3-5

6-8

9-12

13-14

15-16
17-18

1.0 Introduction
The Constitution is the central of the doctrine of ministerial responsibility as it plays a
fundamental role between the executive and the parliament. The ministerial responsibility
plays an important convention role in the parliamentary system of government. Thus, the
convention is needed in order to maintain a united public face and also confidence and public
support for the government.1 The definition of ministerial responsibility can be described as a
constitutional convention where it is hard to define the certainty of circumstances depending
on the persons case.
The doctrine of ministerial responsibility is the backbone of the cabinet system and
ministerial responsibility needs to maintain a relationship of check and balance between the
executives and legislative because it is the primary aim for this doctrine. 2 According to
Marshall and Moodie, where they describe ministerial responsibility as a general conduct of
government which includes exercising various powers of the Monarchy, Parliament and
electorates.3 In the doctrine of ministerial responsibility can be divided into two parts,
individual

responsibility

and

collective

responsibility.

Individual

and

collective

responsibilities are two examples of important conventions sources of the constitutional law.
In individual responsibility, ministers are basically responsible for their own actions
or even an action which is not known to him. In other words, the ministers have to accept
every responsibility for any failures that happen in administration because any injustice
action from the individual or any aspect of policy will be criticized in the parliament whether
it is personal problem or not.
In collective responsibility however, it requires all the ministers to take equal
responsibility of their decisions towards other ministers. In Lord Salisburys classic theory,
where he stated that every member of the Cabinet has an absolute responsibility as a team to
the Parliament and whatever discussions made by the Cabinets are confidential. Therefore, if
1 Simpson, M. (2013, 14th May). Tutor2u. [Weblog]. Retrieved 5 September
2015, from
http://beta.tutor2u.net/politics/blog/revision-update-executivecollective-individual-ministerial-responsibility

2 Faruqi, S.S. (2008). Document of Destiny. Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan,
Malaysia: Star Publications
1 (Malaysia).

Barnett, H. (2006). Responsible Government. In

Administrative Law (6th ed., p. 281). Routledge-Cavendish.

Constitutional

and

there are any Ministers who unable to support a decision or refuse to obey the confidentiality
rule is required to resign.4
In our parliamentary system consist of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, the House of
Representatives and the Senate. Thus, the Yang di-Pertuan Agong is basically the head of the
executive branch. Although he may be the head of the state but he is not the head of
government. The head of government would be the Prime Minister.
According to article 55 of the Federal Constitution shows that the King can summon
Parliament to be in session. Moreover, the King can also dissolve Parliament. As for the
House of Representative, there are 222 members which represent a Parliament Constituency.
Normally, the general election is held every 5 years in order to elect new members of the
House of Representatives and the parties with the most votes will be the new government to
rule the country. However, in order to be a member of the House of Representative, the
person must be a Malaysian citizen, must be at the age of 21 years old and above, must be
sound mind, not a bankruptcy, and must not be in the member of both Houses.5
Other than that, the Senate consist of 70 members that can be divided into 26
members and 44 members. Basically, 26 members were elected to represent 13 states by the
State Legislative Assembly. However, 44 members were appointed by the Yang di-Pertuan
Agong on the advice of the Prime Minister, which includes the members from the Federal
Territory of Kuala Lumpur, Federal Territory of Labuan and Putrajaya. In order to be a
member of the Senate, basically you must be a Malaysian citizen, must be above 30 years
old, and must be sound mind and not a bankruptcy. Thus, the terms of the office are 3 years
for a maximum of two terms.6

4 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2
September,
2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY

5 Harding, A. (1996). Law,

2 government, and the Constitution in Malaysia (p. 91).
The Hague, London: Kluwer Law International.

6 See Article 45 of the Federal Constitution.

Individual Ministerial Responsibility

2.0 Definition
An individual ministerial responsibility is a constitutional convention in governments
practicing the Westminster system. The responsibility of an individual minister for their own
conduct and that of their departments is a vital aspect of accountable and democratic
parliamentary government. Individual responsibility can be found on unwritten conventions
and political norms while collective ministerial responsibility can be found in the Malaysian
Federal Constitution in Article 43(3). The individual responsibility underlines the elective
nature of the office of a Minister. Individual responsibility can be divided to two for
necessary purposes; individual responsibility for personal conduct and individual
responsibility for policy and administration7. As of the personal conduct, for example,
Ministers are liable when they are faced with any sex scandal or a matter has been brought to
him but he completely ignores it. Individual responsibility for policy and administration shall
be elaborated below. The theory of individual ministerial responsibility comprises of policy
culpability, vicarious liability, responsible for Monarchs acts, legislation duties and vote of
censure.
2.1 Policy Culpability
Every Minister from its own department is required to practice its policy culpability.
Policy culpability is known, as the ministers shall take responsibility or problems that arrive
in his department. Whether they are of good opinions in the parliament or administrative
errors in his department that is not of his doing, the Minister must take all responsibility in his
department. A given example is when a question arises and a Minister is unable to answer
questions that he faces or any sort of mismanagement in his department, he shall face the
Parliament whether he is to be dismissed from the Cabinet. He is expected to apologize and
admits his error for any actions done by his department and must take appropriate measures
7 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2 September, 2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
3
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY

to correct his department. However, in Malaysia, the practice is not necessarily accurate. The
questions brought up in Parliamentary meetings are not answered due to insufficient time.
The number of questions that can be asked by a Member of Parliament is 20 questions per
meeting with a given time of thirty minutes a sitting. When the Minister regarding his
department answers questions, there are inaccurate and the topic of the answer will differ
from the question given, leaving the questioner unsatisfied. Ministers can choose to not
answer a question when it concerns any issues of public interest. Sometimes, the scope of the
question may be too wide or it concerns the secrecy of the government, which they wish to
uphold.
2.2 Vicarious Liability
Vicarious liability is a doctrine also known as respondeat superior, translated from
Latin, which is known as let the master answer. This doctrine is based on employeremployee relationship.8 Continuing from the first point above, a minister is responsible for
the acts of his civil servants below. When they have caused dissatisfaction to the people and
have been brought to the attention of The Cabinet, the Minister shall be required to answer
the attacks thrown by the Members of the Parliament. This convention is not actually
practiced in reality, as the administration of the department cannot be brought upon the
parliament. A Minister cannot be held responsible for the acts of every civil servant in his
department. Furthermore, every parliamentary meeting would deem unreasonable if they
were to give comments for every civil servants act.
2.3 Responsibility for Monarchs Acts
A Minister is deemed to be responsible for the formal acts of the Monarch. Article
40(1) of the Federal Constitution discusses the Yang di-Pertuan Agong shall seek the advice
of the Cabinet or a Minster acting under the provisions of the Cabinet. The Yang di-Pertuan
Agong can also ask any Minister requesting information of a specific Ministry. For example,
if the Yang di-Pertuan Agong wanted to know home affairs of the State then he would ask the
Home Minister. However, if anything goes wrong, the Minister shall be liable for the acts of
the Monarch as he was in charge of advising his Majesty.
4

Definition
of
vicarious
dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vicarious+liability

liability

http://legal-

2.4 Legislation
Next, a Minister shall always open debate concerning the affairs of his department. He
recognizes the formation of his department, as he should represent the department during the
meetings of a Parliament. His fellow workers shall bring issues concerning the department
and he must start a debate in Parliament discussing the issues that he has faced.
2.5 Vote of Censure
If a vote of censure has been posted against a Minister, he must resign. In reality, this
has never happened. The Cabinet will have to cast a vote of censure to a Minister only when
he is involved in a personal and irresponsible act that brings shame to the government.
Whether the Minister publicly faces humiliation by the Members of Parliament, when he still
has the support of the Prime Minister, then he shall continue his duty. In practical terms, a
Minister usually resigns when his wrongdoings have affected the government so greatly that
he is ashamed to further continue his duties.
2.6 The Real Life Examples of Individual Responsibility
For example, former Malaysian Health Minister, Datuk Seri Dr. Chua Soi Lek resigns
from Cabinet due to the sex scandal he was involved. He announced his immediate
resignation in a press conference after he admitted he was the man involved in the video 9.
This would be an example that individual responsibility has no effect on Ministers. They
choose to resign immediately rather than taking responsible for all of his actions.

9 Thestarcommy. (2008). Chua resigns after sex scandal. Retrieved 2 January

2008, from http://www.thestar.com.my/story/?file=%2f2008%2f1%2f2%2fnation
%2f20080102155121&sec=nation

Collective Cabinet Responsibility

3.0 Definition
Collective cabinet responsibility or also known as cabinet collective responsibility

10

is a fundamental constitutional convention in government using the British Westminster

parliamentary system according to which ministers are responsible to the parliament for the
conduct of their ministry and government as a whole and must support all governmental
decisions made in Cabinet, even if the members does not agree with them. In other words, a
cabinet is collectively responsible towards people by a process through the parliament, for
deciding and implementing policies for the government.
In Malaysia, collective responsibility is acknowledged in Article 43(3) of the Federal
Constitution which stated that cabinet shall be collectively responsible to Parliament.
3.1 Parliamentary Executive
Malaysia is a country, which practices federal constitutional monarchy or
Parliamentary Democracies 11where the head of the Country is the Yang di-Pertuan Agong
and the head of the government is the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister of Malaysia must
be the member of the parliament and the leader of the cabinet. The parliamentary system in
Malaysia is based from the British Westminster system. It is a system of democratic
governance of a state in which the executive branch derives its democratic legitimacy from
and is held accountable to, the legislature (parliament); thus the executive and the legislative
are interconnected. The Parliamentary Executive is stated under Article 43(2), the Prime
Minister and his Cabinet must belong to Parliament (the former to the Dewan Rakyat) in
order to ensure answerability, accountability and responsibility to Parliament.

10

Britannicacom. (2015). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved 5 September,

2015, from http://global.britannica.com/topic/ministerial-responsibility

11 Lawteachernet. (2015).
6 Lawteachernet. Retrieved 5 September, 2015, from
http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-law/malaysianpractices-of-parliamentary-democracies-administrative-law-essay.php

3.2 Unanimity
Unanimity12, in general, is an agreement by all people in a given situation. Under the
collective responsibility, unanimity means that all ministers must speak in one voice. They
have to agree with the cabinet at all matters. In Malaysia, the ministers must show that they
are unified to the public and to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong. This is to show the government is
strong and to maintain the confidence level towards the people. If the government is not
united, it will lose the peoples confidence.
It's also stated by Lord Salisbury: For all passes in Cabinet every member of it who
does not resign is absolutely and irretrievably responsible and has no right afterwards to say
he agreed in one case to a compromise, while in another he was persuaded by his
colleagues it is only on the principle that absolute responsibility is undertaken by every
member of the cabinet, who, after decision is arrived at, remains a member of it, that the
joint responsibility of Ministers to Parliament can be upheld and one of the essential
principles of parliamentary responsibility established. [Official Report, HC Cols 833-34, 8
April 1878]
If the Minister does not agree with a Cabinet decision he or she has three alternatives;
firstly he keep quiet about it; secondly the minister can decide to resign and; or have his
dissent recorded in Cabinet minutes.
3.3 Maintaining Confidence
It is crucial for the government to maintain the confidence in the lower house and
nation in order to rule the country. If the vote of no confidence being passed towards the
Prime Minister, he will have to options; the first option is to resign and the second option is to
advise Yang di-Pertuan Agong to dissolve the parliament. Another example is that if a vote of
no confidence is passed in parliament, the government of the day is responsible collectively,
12 Faruqi, S. S (2008). Document
of Destiny: The Constitution of the Federation
7
of Malaysia . Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan, Malaysia: Star Publications
(Malaysia).

and thus the entire members of the government should resigns. There is differences between
the Cabinet collective responsibility and individual ministerial responsibility, in which
ministers are responsible and, therefore, accountable of their departments.

3.4 Secrecy
When a person becomes Minister, he or she has to vow both under the law and
conventions to keep the secret in relation to all deliberations of the cabinet. This secrecy is a
life long for the minister even after they leave the office.
3.5 Answerable To Monarch
In general meaning, the minister remaining legally answerable to the monarch but
politically answerable to the parliament. In Malaysia, the members of Cabinet owe a political
responsibility to the Yang di-Pertuan Agong in terms of the conduct of the government. Under
Article 40(1) of the Federal Constitution, the monarch has the right to all information about
the government. Yang di-Pertuan Agong has the right to

enquiry, advice and warn the

members of the cabinet if the policy that being passed by parliament will bring more harm
than good to the nation.
3.6 The Real life Example in Collective Cabinet Responsibility
An example of the collective responsibility is in the United Kingdom. The issue is
based on The Iraq War13 in 2003 where two members of the cabinet resigned from their
position. The members are from the Leader of the House of Commons and former Foreign
Secretary on a basis of disagreement to support the government decision to go war. Another
example is that Lord Palmerston resigned in 1853 due to the Lord John Russells Reform Bill.
He could not agree with that Bill. Another example is that General Peel and three others
resigned in 1867 because they could not support Disraelis Reform Bill 14. That bill

13 Barnett, H. (c2013). Constitutional and Administrative Law. (Tenth Edition

ed.). USA and Canada: Routledge.
8
14 Jennings, I. (1959). Cabinet Government . (3rd ed.). England: The Cambridge
University Press.

enfranchised part of the urban male to vote. This doubles the number of a male who can vote
on that time. In 1957, Lord Salisbury resigned after the release of Archbishop Makarios.
Situation in Malaysia, the case of the corruption in Port Klang relating to Port Klang Free
Zone

15

(PKFZ), the transport minister back then was Dr Ling Liong Sik where he took the

responsibility and resigned although he was proven innocent. However, It should have been
collective cabinet responsibility where all the cabinet members should resign due to this
controversial issue. It shows that the government is incompetent to handle the country.

15 Mageswari and Tariq, M. & Q. (2013). Thestarcommy. Retrieved 5 September,

2015, from
http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2013/10/25/Ling-foundinnocent-in-PKFZ-cheating-case/

Concept of Ministerial Responsibility in Malaysia

4.0 The Practice of Ministerial Responsibility in Malaysia
In Malaysia, the concept of ministerial today is sort of different as comparing from paper to
reality. Firstly, the collective responsibility tends to block the individual responsibility 16.
According to the doctrine of ministerial responsibility which concerns in the individual
responsibility, in case where a Minster receives a vote of censure which is passed against him
due to personal impropriety, he must resign. However, in Malaysia, this situation is hardly
being seen. The reason is, when a Minister is being criticized by the Parliament by passing a
vote of censure, the government will usually rally behind the Minister, and thus, at the end
the Minister gets rid of the responsibility to resign. This is contradicted to the doctrine of
ministerial responsibility as a Ministers act of omission or commission may escape the
parliamentary censure. For example, in 2004, Works Minister Datuk Seri S. Samy Vellu who
was under the shoddy construction project, had been criticized.17 However, he was able to
rebuff the calls for resignation because the cabinet protected him. In the recent exception case
of Datuk Chua Soi Lek, because of his personal scandal, he resigned from his post. Compare
to UK, there were 125 resignations happened in the 20th century. 14 cases of resignation were
due to personal scandal or private financial affairs.18 Hence, unlike UK, resignation from
Ministers is rarely to be seen in Malaysia.
4.1 Moral Duty of the Ministers
Minsters are bound to the collective responsibility and indeed they have the moral duty to
protect the integrity of the cabinet and the government, but it does not mean that they can
simply excuse the personal wrongdoings of their fellow ministers. According to Mavis
16 Faruqi, S.S. (2014, 30th October). The Star Online. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2
September
http://www.thestar.com.my/Opinion/Columnists/Reflecting-On-TheLaw/Profile/Articles/2014/10/30/Revisiting-ministerial-responsibility/

2015, from

17

Puthucheary,
M. (2015,
30th
July). The
Malaysian
Insider. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2
September
2015, from
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/who-has-contradicted-theconcept-of-collective-responsibility-mavis-puthuch
10

18 Parlgcca. (2015). Parliament of Canada. Retrieved 2 September, 2015, from

http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/FederalGovernment/MinisterialResign
ations.aspx

Puthucheary, he said that in fact is the Prime Minister who has the responsibility to take
action on those who does something which is contradicting the doctrine of collective
responsibility. 19Therefore, if the Prime Minister does not take any action against a Minister
who has been found to have misconduct a serious personal offence, the country might have to
bear the risk of having the whole government fall. In Malaysia, the Prime Minister is also the
Minister of Finance. But what if the Prime Minister directly involves in a financial scandal
yet does not resign? In fact, the cabinet as a whole may revolt against the Prime Minister. If
there is no action to censure taken by the cabinet, it will be brought up in Parliament where it
is probably to result in a vote-no-confidence against the Prime Minister.
4.2 Refusal to Answer During Question Time
Second, in the matter of individual responsibility, Ministers tend to refuse to answer
during question time by Parliament, by giving reasons of security or other grounds. 20This
shows that the widespread of the secrecy in government, and thus the Parliament is unable to
get clear and accurate information from them. For instance, when comes to questions on
grounds of national security, foreign relationships and other aspect of public interest,
Ministers have the rights to not to answer. Furthermore, less time is given to the opposition
Parliament to question the Minister, and plus, Parliament is limited to only 20 question per
meeting21. Sometimes, the questions which are answered by the Ministers are inadequate and
not satisfactory.
4.3 Ministers Responsibility on Behalf of Civil Servants Action

19

Puthucheary,
M. (2015,
30th
July). The
Malaysian
Insider. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2
September
2015, from
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/who-has-contradicted-theconcept-of-collective-responsibility-mavis-puthuch

20 Faruqi, S.S. (2008). Document of Destiny. Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul Ehsan,
Malaysia: Star Publications (Malaysia).

21 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2 11
September,
2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY

Thirdly, when comes to the usual practice that a Minister is vicariously responsible to
Parliament on behalf of his civil servants action, it may not be effective in todays system.
This is because size of the department has been increasing as well as the complexity of this
modern government have made the doctrine unworkable. Therefore, a Minister cannot really
take the responsibility for every action of the civil staff which is under his department. In
addition, government today has become so powerful until the administration of departments
of the state cannot be scrutinised. In the case of questioning about the vicarious responsibility
of Minister for the acts of his civil servant, Parliament has not given enough time to scrutiny
thoroughly.
4.4 Maintaining The Confidence of The Lower House
Fourth, in the doctrine of collective responsibility, there is a rule which requires the
government to maintain the confidence of the Lower House by virtue of Article 43(4). The
situation where government had lost their confidence is never happened before in Malaysia at
its federal level. But however, there were 3 resignation happened at state level since Merdeka.
Those who resigned were Stephen Kalong Ningkan in Sarawak in 1996, Datuk Harun Idris in
Selangor in 1976 and Datuk Mohammad Nasir in Kelantan 1977. However in the incident of
1976, a defeated Menteri Besar who should leave his post was not resign because his exco
(Ministers) did not pass his resignation. This presented that the doctrine of collective
responsibility had been partial breached by our ministers. Therefore, it can be said that the
efficacy of the doctrine is declined because what amounts to a matter of confidence is not
very clear to be seen in Malaysia.
4.5 Unanimity in Malaysia Parliament
Fifth, the doctrine of collective responsibility requires that the Prime Minister and his
cabinet must come from either Houses of Parliament, for the sake of upholding the public
unanimity. In reality, however, somehow this convention can be avoided when there is a
situation where political disagreements within Cabinet are of such extent that the Prime
Minister finds it more practical to put aside the convention rather than having the convention
broken by the members of Cabinet. However, people today have treat this issue of public
contradiction between the members of Cabinet as something that is normal in our country.
12

But in theory, the convention should not be operate that way.

Furthermore, Malaysia is under the system of Westminister as based upon UK.
Therefore, the executive must come from both Houses of Parliament, which are the Dewan

Rakyat and Dewan Negara.22 Executive must come from Parliament so that the executive is
accountable and answerable to the Parliament. But, somehow in reality, the executive is not
doing their obligation, this is because there is a secrecy in the doctrine of ministerial
responsibility which is considered paramount. Sadly, this convention has been used as a
weapon to avoid from giving information to the Parliament when comes to the parliamentary
scrutiny through procedures like question time, debates and select committee system. This is
hard for Parliament to uphold the concept of check and balances under the separation of
powers and to collect information from the government since the power of secrecy so
widespread in government. Certain areas like foreign policy, national security, management
of Non-Financial-Institutions, and economic strategies are difficult to be enforce in
Parliamentary scrutiny. For, instance, in Malaysia, some Non-Financial Institutions like
Petronas that are not require to hand in their accounts to the Auditor- General and to the
Dewan Rakyats Public Accounts Committee. Compare to UK, the ministerial responsibility
is subjected to a number of enquires, such as the Nolan Committee, the Scott Report and the
Public Service Committee. 23The importance of this ministerial responsibility is not to seek
for resignation of the minters, but is for the purpose of providing satisfactory answer to
parliamentary question so that parliament can recapture its role as the grand inquest of the
nation. Thus, by right, Ministers should be answerable and the Parliament should be able to
get to know the information clearly from the minister during question time before it can
successfully hold the government accountable.
4.6 Executive Branch Usurpation of Power
Lastly, in Malaysia, the Prime Minister is very powerful as he can control the cabinet, and he
even control Parliament. In our system, it supposed to be the Parliament to control the
executive. But in reality, executive ended up control Parliament. One of the reasons is our
current system encourages the bigger party to get more seats in Parliament and that is why the
ruling party normally have big majority seats of Parliament. Another reason is the electoral

22 Agora-parl.org. (2015). Malaysia - Parliaments constitutional role | Agora

Portal.
Retrieved
2
September
2015,
from
http://www.agoraparl.org/news/malaysia-parliament%E2%80%99s-constitutional-role
13

23 Santiago, J. (2009, 5th February). What's Your Problem?. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2

September 2015, from http://justin-santiago.blogspot.com/2009/02/ministerialresponsibility.html

system in Malaysia always favours the bigger party. Hence, today, it can be said that the
Parliament is no longer able to control executive.

14

Recommendations and Guidelines Towards Ministerial Responsibility

5.0 What Can Be Done?
Ministerial responsibility involves more on the political side than the legal. If the
ministers could not be accountable for their actions on the actions of their department, then
democracy will not work. There are few recommendations for the operation of our doctrine
of ministerial responsibilities.
5.1 Increasing the Power of the Parliament
Firstly, the power of Parliament to scrutinize and investigate the Minister should be
increased. By increasing Parliaments power, it would be able for the Parliament to reveal the
veil of secrecy that hides most government activities from the public. 24 This for sure will
maintain the relationship of check and balance between the executive and the legislature. At
the same time, Parliament is able to become the grand inquest of the nation which is similar
with UKs Parliament system.
5.2 The Role of the Press and Media
As for the second recommendation, the press or media has an important role in our country
especially when it comes to ministerial responsibility operations where the media should be
pro-active of bringing up such issues. For example, media can sometimes be forceful to
make a Minister to resign or at least to take responsibility for what they had done. Let us take
Datuk Seri Dr Soi Leks case as an example, where he had quitted his position as health
minister in the year 2008 over a sex video that he had appeared in 25. Due to that issue, it
became headlines of the public view because of the wide coverage by the media. In another
way of saying it is that, the media should play an important role of bringing up such matter to
24 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2
September,
2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY
15

25 Faruqi, S.S. (2014, 30th October). The Star Online. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2
September
http://www.thestar.com.my/Opinion/Columnists/Reflecting-On-TheLaw/Profile/Articles/2014/10/30/Revisiting-ministerial-responsibility/

2015, from

be discussed in forum. Thus, the government should always be ready to deal with whatever
circumstances that is going to happen in respect of the press freedom. Basically, the
government should face the fact instead of criticizing the issue by being accountable to the
Parliament and the electorate.
5.3 Increasing the Oppositions Strength
For the third recommendation, the opposition in Parliament is needed to increase their
strength by increasing the resources of back-benchers and opposition parties plus giving them
access to official information. When a ruling party is strong in Parliament, minister will tend
to hide their charges of misconduct by stifled under the blanket of party solidarity. 26Hence,
it should be possible to equip the role of opposition Parliament so that they have the sufficient
opportunities to make proper criticisms and scrutinizes.
5.4 Limit the Power of Prime Minister
Fourth, the Prime Minister should not abuse his power. At the end of the day, we have
to have Prime Minister who practices Prime Ministerial Government. By right, the Prime
Minister should practice the Cabinet Ministerial Government 27. 28Since the Prime Minister
is so powerful, he can control the whole cabinet himself, and is difficult for the Parliament to
control them. Therefore, the system of Cabinet Ministerial Government ought to be
practiced as it would make it easy for the government to be accountable to the Parliament.
5.5 Public Opinion
Lastly, the role of public opinion is also significance in seeking for an accountable,
answerable and responsible government. The state of public opinion should be increased,
26 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2
September,
2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY

27

Bari, A.A. (1999). Cabinet Principles in Malaysia: The Law and

Practice. Retrieved 2 16
September,
2015, from
http://journals.iium.edu.my/intdiscourse/index.php/islam/article/viewFile/497/443

28

especially on matters such as maladministration and misadministration which involve the

government. This can be done through the mass media by giving necessary information to the
public. Thus, public opinion can help enforce the doctrine of ministerial responsibility from
ministers by supplying the public with necessary information which the public requires in
their quest for a responsible government.

17

Conclusion
Based on the Westminster System which is being practiced in Malaysia, every ministers,
deputy ministers and parliamentary representatives are committed to publicly support every
government decisions made in Cabinet, even if they do not agree with it. By having a cabinet
collective responsibility, if there is a vote of no confidence being passed in parliament, it
means that the government will be responsible collectively, and thus the entire government
must resign. Cabinet collective responsibility is not the same as individual ministerial
responsibility, in which ministers are responsible and therefore responsible for the running of
their departments.
Apart from that, most political scientist were inclined to criticize the practice of the
separation of powers in the Federal and state government and to stressed out instead on the
cabinet or parliamentary form of organization. According to Woodrow Wilson, former
President of the United State, federal government lack strength because its powers are
divided, lacks promptness because its authorities are multiplied, lacks wieldiness because its
processes are roundabout, lacks efficiency because its responsibility is indirect and its action
is without competent direction.29 The separation of powers works hand in hand with another
principle known as responsible government, to guide the way law is made and managed and
protected. Responsible government means that a single party, or coalition of parties, must
maintain the support of the majority of members of the House of Representatives in order to
remain in government. This provides another check on the Executive, ensuring they are
accountable to the Parliament and do not abuse their power.
This is where check and balance comes into the frame. Having an absolute separation of
powers will undeniably slow down the decision-making process of the government whilst the
lack of separation of power will turn the country into corruption and tyranny. By having
check and balance, done by a non governmental agencies can help to bring the perpetrators of
such unlawful acts to the courts and be prosecuted justly by an impartial judge.
Accountability must take precedence over everything. This is however non existence within
the Malaysian system of law and order, and of fair and responsible governance.
18

29 Haines, C.G. (1922). Ministerial Responsibility Versus the Separation of

Powers. The American Political Science Review, 16(2), 194-210. Retrieved 2

September, 2015, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1943959

However, although this doctrine has been incorporated into the Federal Constitution of
Malaysia, it can be argued that it is on the basis of mere constitutional convention thus cannot
be enforced by legal (as opposed to political) sanctions 30. This arguments is incorrect because
without a ministerial responsibility, the nation would end up in corruptions and under
dictatorship.
Parliamentarians, ministers, and public servants all have a critical role to play in
supporting and strengthening the accountability of the government. To the greatest extent
possible, for the public good, they need to work together effectively in fulfilling their specific
responsibilities, respecting the roles of others. The doctrine and practice of ministerial
responsibility is the way to our national political foundations. Getting it right is crucial, and
agreement on fundamental principles is needed in order for that to happen. Specifically, in
improving the application and practice of the doctrine of ministerial responsibility, certain
core principles of the accountability framework must remain constant. Even in the complex
and changing environment within which government operates, they remain relevant and will
guide the government as it moves forward to strengthen accountability.

30 Masum, A. (2012). The Doctrine Of Ministerial Responsibility In Malaysia: THEORY AND

PRACTICE IN A NEW REGIME OF PARLIAMENTARY ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan Law Journal
Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2
September,
2015, from
https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_2012_Volume_4_The_Doctri
19
ne_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Theory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliam
entary_Accountability_THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEORY
_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTABILITY

References
Simpson,

M. (2013,

September

14th

2015, from

May). Tutor2u. [Weblog]. Retrieved 5

http://beta.tutor2u.net/politics/blog/revision-

update-executive-collective-individual-ministerial-responsibility
Faruqi, S.S. (2008). Document of Destiny. Petaling Jaya, Selangor Darul
Ehsan, Malaysia: Star Publications (Malaysia).
Barnett, H. (2006). Responsible Government. In Constitutional and
Administrative Law (6th ed., p. 281). Routledge-Cavendish.
Masum,
Malaysia:

A. (2012). The
THEORY

PARLIAMENTARY

Doctrine

AND

Of

Ministerial

PRACTICE

IN

Responsibility

NEW

ACCOUNTABILITY. Malayan

Articles, 4(5), . Retrieved 2

REGIME

Law

September,

In
OF

Journal
2015, from

https://www.academia.edu/5393475/Malayan_Law_Journal_Articles_201
2_Volume_4_The_Doctrine_of_Ministerial_Responsibility_in_Malaysia_Th
eory_and_Practice_in_a_New_Regime_of_Parliamentary_Accountability_
THE_DOCTRINE_OF_MINISTERIAL_RESPONSIBILITY_IN_MALAYSIA_THEO
RY_AND_PRACTICE_IN_A_NEW_REGIME_OF_PARLIAMENTARY_ACCOUNTA
BILITY
Harding, A. (1996). Law, government, and the Constitution in Malaysia
(p. 91). The Hague, London: Kluwer Law International.
See Article 45 of the Federal Constitution.

Definition

of

vicarious

liability

http://legal-

dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vicarious+liability
Thestarcommy. (2008). Chua resigns after sex scandal. Retrieved 2
January

2008, from

http://www.thestar.com.my/story/?file=

%2f2008%2f1%2f2%2fnation%2f20080102155121&sec=nation
20

Britannicacom. (2015). Encyclopedia

Britannica. Retrieved 5

September, 2015, from http://global.britannica.com/topic/ministerialresponsibility

 Lawteachernet. (2015). Lawteachernet. Retrieved 5

2015, from

September,

http://www.lawteacher.net/free-law-essays/administrative-

law/malaysian-practices-of-parliamentary-democracies-administrativelaw-essay.php
Barnett,

H. (c2013). Constitutional

and

Administrative

Law. (Tenth

Edition ed.). USA and Canada: Routledge.

Jennings,

I. (1959). Cabinet

Government . (3rd

ed.). England: The

Cambridge University Press.

Mageswari and Tariq, M. & Q. (2013). Thestarcommy. Retrieved 5
September,

2015, from

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Nation/2013/10/25/Ling-foundinnocent-in-PKFZ-cheating-case/
Faruqi,

S.S. (2014,

30th

Online. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2

October). The

Star

September

2015, from

http://www.thestar.com.my/Opinion/Columnists/Reflecting-On-TheLaw/Profile/Articles/2014/10/30/Revisiting-ministerial-responsibility/
Puthucheary,

M. (2015,

30th

Insider. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2

July). The

Malaysian

September

2015, from

http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/who-hascontradicted-the-concept-of-collective-responsibility-mavis-puthuch
Parlgcca. (2015). Parliament

of

Canada. Retrieved 2

September,

2015, from
http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/FederalGovernment/Ministe
rialResignations.aspx
Agora-parl.org. (2015). Malaysia - Parliaments constitutional role |
Agora Portal. Retrieved 2 September 2015, from http://www.agoraparl.org/news/malaysia-parliament%E2%80%99s-constitutional-role
Santiago,

J. (2009,
21

5th

February). What's

Your

Problem?. [Weblog]. Retrieved 2 September 2015, from http://justinsantiago.blogspot.com/2009/02/ministerial-responsibility.html

 Bari,

A.A. (1999). Cabinet

Practice. Retrieved 2

Principles

in

Malaysia:

September,

The

Law

and

2015, from

http://journals.iium.edu.my/intdiscourse/index.php/islam/article/viewFile/497/4
43
Haines, C.G. (1922). Ministerial Responsibility Versus the Separation of
Powers. The

American

210. Retrieved 2

Political

Science

September,

http://www.jstor.org/stable/1943959

22

Review, 16(2), 1942015, from