RULING BY THE HON MR SPEAKER ON THE POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON 14TH MARCH, 2019, BY MR J J MWIIMBU, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR MONZE CENTRAL PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY, ON POINT OF ORDER TO RAISE A MOTION OF ADJOURNMENT

RULING BY THE HON MR SPEAKER ON THE POINT OF ORDER RAISED ON 14TH MARCH, 2019, BY MR J J MWIIMBU, LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION, AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT FOR MONZE CENTRAL PARLIAMENTARY CONSTITUENCY, ON POINT OF ORDER TO RAISE A MOTION OF ADJOURNMENT ON A DEFINITE URGENT MATTER OF PUBLIC IMPORTANCE UNDER STANDING ORDERS 33 AND 34

__________________________________________________

Hon Members, the House will recall that on Thursday, 14th March, 2019, when the House was considering Question for Oral Answer No. 340 on the Order Paper, and the Hon Member for Kapiri Mposhi Parliamentary Constituency, Mr S Kakubo, MP was asking a Supplementary Question, Hon J J Mwiimbu, Leader of the Opposition, and Member of Parliament for Monze Central Parliamentary Constituency, raised a Point of Order.  In his Point of Order, Hon Mwiimbu expressed himself in the following terms:

 

“Mr Speaker, I rise on a very important Point of Order emanating from Standing Order 33(1), (2) and (3), and 34 (1), (2), (3), (4) and (5).

 

Mr Speaker, the issues I am going to raise relate to the adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance.  I would like to bring to your attention the fact that the country is undergoing severe financial distress.  I would like to urge this House to salvage the country from its financial distress–

‘That this House urges the Government to take urgent measures to salvage the country from its current financial distress that has led to the failure to finance all the three wings of Government.  The medical and educational institutions have been severely affected threatening the economic foundation and security of the country.’

 

Mr Speaker, with your indulgence, I would like to deliver my statement.”

 

The statement, as indicated in the Point of Order, is expressed in the following terms:

 

“That this House urges the Government to take urgent measures to salvage the country from its current financial distress that has led to failure to finance all the three wings of Government.  The medical and educational institutions have been severely affected threatening the economic foundation and security of the country.”

 

Hon Members, in my immediate response, I accepted the statement, referred to above, and indicated that I needed to peruse the same.  I have since not only perused the statement, but also reflected further on the relevant Standing Orders - 33 and 34 - in order to render a complete, informed, and measured response, to the Point of Order raised by Hon J J Mwiimbu, Leader of the Opposition, and Member of Parliament for Monze Central.  The resultant ruling is as follows.

Hon Members, I wish to state from the outset, that resort to Standing Orders 33 and 34 of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2016, is unprecedented.  The practice relating to these Orders is, presumably, largely unfamiliar, to many Hon Members.  Therefore, the Point of Order provides me an opportunity to guide the House on how the Standing Orders in question, ought to be broached, and operate.

 

In so doing, Hon Members, the Point of Order, raises in my considered view, the following seminal questions:

1.     First, how is the business of the House placed on the Order Paper;

2.     Second, whether permission of the Speaker to move a motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance under Standing Orders 33 and 34, can be made through a Point of Order;

3.     Third, whether a Member must give the Speaker prior notice to move a Motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance under Standing Orders 33 and 34;

 

4.     Fourth, what are the general admissibility conditions for a motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public or national importance; and

 

5.     Lastly, whether Hon J J Mwiimbu, MP’s request to debate an adjournment motion on a definite urgent matter of public importance, under Standing Orders 33, and 34 is admissible.

 

I will address these questions seriatim:

 

1.     How is the business of the House placed on the Order Paper?

 

Hon Members, in almost all commonwealth Parliaments, business to be considered each sitting day is placed on the Order Paper in accordance with the Standing Orders or Rules of a particular Parliament.  This means that every item of business placed on the Order paper requires prior notice to be given, in order for it to be placed on the Order Paper, and considered by the House. In this regard, Erskine May, the learned author of the often quoted book, entitled "Parliamentary Practice, Twenty-Second Edition (London: Butterworths, 1997), states at page 217, as follows: "an item which requires notice, but is omitted from the Order Paper, cannot be taken."

 

Also, M.N Kaul and S.L Shakdher on Practice and Procedure of Parliament, (New Delhi, Metropolitan Book Company P.V. T Limited, 2009) states at page 488 as follows, regarding listing of the business of the House:

“A List of Business is the list of items of business, Government and private members, which are scheduled to be taken up in the House on a particular day or a number of days in the order as indicated therein. The Secretary-General causes the List of Business to be prepared which is made available to each member before the commencement of the sitting of the House on that day. The first item in the List of Business is generally “Questions”. However, items like oath/affirmation by new members, obituary references, and introduction of new Ministers to the House, precede “Questions”.........The List of Business, the list of questions, the list of amendments, the list of cut motions, and the Bills, all combined, form the Order Paper for the day.

No business not included in the List of Business for the day is permitted to be taken up at any sitting, unless the Speaker gives previous permission to do so.  In case a member desires to raise, a matter not included in the List of Business, he has to write to the Speaker stating the matter that he wishes to raise, and if the Speaker gives the permission, only then the member can raise it in the House.”   

Furthermore, M.N Kaul and S.L Shakdher, supra, at pages 458-459, state as follows:

“In order to keep the House informed about matters of public importance or to state the government’s policy in regard to a matter of topical interest, Ministers make statements in the House from time to time with the consent of the Speaker.  A Minister who desires to make a statement has to intimate in advance, the date on which he proposes to make the statement. The intimation is required to be sent, as far as possible, at least one day in advance, so that the item may be included in the List of Business.”

 

All the authorities l have cited above, point to the requirement of prior notice for an item to be placed on the Order Paper.  In our case, the placement of items on the Order Paper, is regulated by Standing Order 26(1) of the National Assembly of Zambia Standing Orders, 2016, which is expressed in the following terms:

"26. (1) Subject to Standing Orders thirty-two, the daily routine of business of the Assembly shall be as follows:

        (a) National Anthem;

        (b) Prayer;

        (c) Introduction of new members;

        (d) Announcements by the Speaker;

(e) A motion relating to the organisation of the Business of

the House;

(f) Statements by Ministers or the Vice-President;

        (g) Personal explanations;

        (h) Questions to Ministers or the Vice-President;

(i) Applications for leave to move the adjournment under standing Order thirty-three;

        (j) Presentation of Bills; and

        (k) Public business.”

        (Underlining is for emphasis sake)

Notably, Standing Order 26(1)(i) referred to above, requires an application for leave to be made in order to move a motion for adjournment under standing Order thirty-three.

Hon Members may wish to note that our Order Paper is prepared on the eve of each sitting day.  Therefore, any member who wishes to move an adjournment motion pursuant to standing Order 26(1)(i) must give prior notice, so that the motion is placed on the Order Paper for the following or subsequent day.

 

2.     Whether permission of the Speaker to move a motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance under standing Orders 33, and 34, can be made through a point of order

 

In order to answer the preceding question, it is necessary in the first place to consider the expression “Point of Order.”  The National Assembly Members’ Handbook, 2006, defines a Point of Order, in the following terms at page 25:

 

A question raised by a Member who believes that rules of procedure of the House have been incorrectly applied or overlooked during the proceedings.  A point of Order can be raised at any time in the proceedings.

 

Further, the National Assembly of Zambia, Parliamentary Procedure (Abstract Series, 1997), defines a Point of Order, at page 1, in the following terms:

 

“A Point of Order is that which relates to the interpretation or enforcement of the rules of procedure and conduct of business in the House or such Articles of the Constitution that regulate the business of the House and must raise a question which is within the cognizance of the Speaker.  To this effect, a Member can and should invite the Speaker’s immediate attention to any instance of what he/she considers a breach of order or transgression of any law of the House, written or unwritten, which the Chair has failed to perceive, and he/she may also seek the guidance and assistance of the Chair in respect of any obscurities in procedure.”

 

In practice, once a Point of Order is raised, the presiding officer has the duty to render a ruling either ex-tempore or at later date. To this end, Standing Order 52, provides, inter alia, as follows:

 

“52. ...After the question of order has been stated to the Speaker or the Chairperson of Committees, as the case may be, by the member raising the question of order, the Speaker or the Chairperson of Committees may give his or her ruling or decision immediately or postpone the decision to a later date.”

 

It is self-evident from the foregoing, that a Point of Order, is a tool or facility available to the Members, to bring to the attention of the Presiding officer, a breach of the rules or procedures of the House. It is further clear that, once a Point of Order has been raised, the Presiding officer is required to render a ruling in the House either ex-tempore or at a later date.  

 

3.     Whether a Member must give the Speaker prior notice to move a Motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance under Standing Orders 33, and 34.

 

The central issue or question that falls to be determined here is whether or not a Member desiring to move a motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public importance under standing orders 33 and 34, requires to give prior notice to the Speaker.

 

Standing Order 33 relating to Motion for Adjournment of the House, is expressed in the following terms:

       

33. (1) A motion for the adjournment of the House shall not be made until immediately before public business is entered upon. However, in an emergency, the Leader of Government Business in the House may, at any time, seek leave of the House to adjourn the House with prior permission from the Speaker.

 

(2) The Leader of Government Business in the House may make a substantive motion for the adjournment of the House either immediately before public business is entered upon or between any two items of public business.

 

(3) Any other member may move a motion for the adjournment of the House (other than a dilatory motion) only by leave under the provision of standing order thirty-four.

(Underlining is for emphasis sake)

 

Standing Order 34, relating to adjournment on definite urgent matter of public importance, is in turn expressed in the following terms:

34(1)        A member asking for permission that the House discusses an urgent matter of public importance, shall rise in his/her place at the stage in the proceedings laid down in Standing Order thirty-three, and state the matter;

(2)    The member referred to in paragraph (1) shall then deliver to the Speaker a written statement of the matter to be discussed;

(3)    The Speaker shall, if the Speaker considers the matter to be one contemplated by this Standing Order, ask the members who support the motion to rise in their places, and, if not less than ten rise accordingly, the Speaker shall declare the permission of the House to have been granted;

(4)    If permission is granted, the motion shall not be considered until 10:15 hours on the same day if that day is a Friday, and until 15:45 hours on other sitting days, or if that hour has arrived, the motion shall be moved at the time when public business would otherwise be entered upon;

(5)    Business under consideration at 10:15 hours on that day, if it be a Friday, shall stand postponed without question put at that hour:

Provided that if the other business for the day is concluded earlier than 10:15 hours on other sitting days, the motion may, with the leave of the House, be then made, or the proceedings of the House may be suspended until 10:15 hours on a Friday or until 15:45 hours on other sitting days, as the case may be; and

 

(6) A motion for the adjournment of the House moved under this Standing Order shall, unless previously disposed of, lapse at 12:55 hours on Fridays and at 19:15 hours on other sitting days. On Tuesdays, Wednesdays, and Thursdays, the business postponed at 15:45 hours shall be resumed at 19:15 hours.

 

Hon Members, before I delve into construction of Orders 33 and 34, I would like to, in the first place, address the notion of a Motion.

 

Hon Members, a motion is a proposition brought before the House for its consideration. In order to bring a proposal before the House, and obtain a decision on it, a motion is necessary.

Further, according to the learned author Audrey O Brien and Marc Bosc, in their book entitled House of Commons Procedure and Practice, 2nd Edition (Ottawa: House of Commons, 2009) at page 528, a motion is defined at page 528, as a proposal moved by one member in accordance with well-established rules, that the House do something, order something done or expects an opinion with regard to some matter. In essence, a motion initiates a discussion, and ultimately gives rise to the question to be decided by the House.

 

Furthermore, the learned authors of the book entitled:  Practice and Procedure of Parliament, M.N Kaul and S.L Shakdher, define a motion at page 694, as: “Any proposal submitted to the House for eliciting a decision of the House. One of the main functions of the House is to ascertain its own will in regard to various matters, and for this purpose, every question to be decided by the House must be proposed by a member in the form of a motion.” 

 

Every motion, once adopted, becomes either an order or resolution of the House.  A resolution of the House is a declaration of opinion or purpose; it does not require that any action be taken, nor is it binding.  Further, in most jurisdictions, motions, except those that are exempted under the Rules of a Parliament, require notice.

 

In our case, the requirement of notice for a motion is provided for in Standing Order 36, in the following terms:

 

Motions not Requiring Notice

 

36.   Every motion requires notice except a motion-

(a)    for the adjournment of the House, or of a debate;

(b)    in Committee of the Whole House;

(c)    raising, at the earliest opportunity, a matter involving a prima facie case of breach of privilege;

(d)    for discharging a member from attendance on a select committee;

(e)    in regard to which notice is dispensed with by leave of the House;

(f)     for the discharge of an order of the day;

(g)    exempting business under Standing Order twenty-two;

(h)    dependent on an order of the day;

(i)     for the reference of a bill to a select or sessional committee after second reading; and

(j)     in terms of Standing Order seventy-one.”

 

It is clear from the foregoing, that save as provided in Order 36, notice is required to be given of a member’s intention to move a motion.  In this way, members are informed in advance, about the nature of the motion, which is printed on the Order Paper.  Since motions typically attract debate, it is paramount that members are afforded notice to enable them adequately prepare for the debate on a motion.

 

In this case, Hon J J Mwiimbu rose on a Point of Order - for avoidance of doubt - in connection with Standing Orders 33(1) (2) (3), and 34(1)(2)(3)(4) and (5).  Therefore, Standing Orders 33 and 34, must be construed conjunctively.  In this case, Standing Order 34, when read in conjunction with Standing Order 26(1)(i) and 33(1) makes it clear, that an adjournment of the House on an urgent matter of public importance is not only a motion, but also in moving the motion, an application for leave must be made. 

 

Further, Standing Order 36, makes it mandatory for all motions, except, the ones exempted therein, that notice be given.  As regards how much notice is required, Erskine May in his book entitled, Parliamentary Practice, Twenty Second Edition, supra, states, at page 331 as follows:

“The rules regulating the requirement of notice, however depend more upon practical than upon logical considerations… except where the length of notice is laid down in the standing orders, there is no rule regulating the amount of notice required.”

 

Therefore, in my considered view absent a rule, the length of notice, will be dictated by the urgency or exigency of the subject or matter prompting the Motion.

 

In reaching the preceding conclusion, I am fortified by the practice and procedure applied in relation to the Motion under discussion, in other Commonwealth Parliaments.  I will advert to five such Parliaments.  First, the United Kingdom.  In the United Kingdom, the House of Commons has also a similar procedure, in their Standing Orders. Standing Order 24, under General Debates, of the Standing Orders of the House of Commons, 2010, is in the following terms:

 

"24-Emergency Debates:

  1. On Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday a Member rising in his place at the commencement of public business may propose, in an application lasting not more than three minutes, that the House should debate a specific and important matter that should have urgent consideration. If the Speaker is satisfied that the matter is proper to be so debated, the Member shall either obtain the leave of the House, or, if such leave be refused, the assent of not fewer than forty Members who shall thereupon rise in their places to support the motion, or, if fewer than forty Members and not fewer than ten shall thereupon rise in their places, the House shall, on a division, upon question put forthwith, determine whether such motion shall be made.

 

  1. If leave is given or the motion is so supported or   the House so determines that it shall be made
  1. the debate shall be held on a motion that the House has considered the specified matter; and
  2. the Speaker shall announce either
  1. the length of the debate and the time at which it is to be held; or
  2. that he will make such a statement at a later named hour during that sitting.

(2A) Proceedings in respect of a debate under this order may last not more than three hours and, at the conclusion of the time allocated to them, pursuant to paragraph (2)(b) of this order, the motion, unless otherwise disposed of, shall lapse.

  1. A Member intending to make an application under this order shall give notice to the Speaker by twelve o’clock on a Monday or Tuesday, half past ten o’clock on a Wednesday or half past nine o’clock on a Thursday, if the urgency of the matter is known at that hour. If the urgency is not so known, he shall give notice as soon thereafter as is practicable. If the Speaker so desires he may defer giving his decision upon whether the matter is proper to be discussed until a named hour, when he may interrupt the proceedings of the House for the purpose.

 

  1. In determining whether a matter is proper to be discussed the Speaker shall have regard to the extent to which it concerns the administrative responsibilities of Ministers of the Crown or could come within the scope of ministerial action.  In determining whether a matter is urgent, the Speaker shall have regard to the probability of the matter being brought before the House in time by other means.

 

  1. The Speaker shall state whether or not he is satisfied that the matter is proper to be discussed without giving the reasons for his decision to the House.

 

  1. If the Speaker announces that the debate will take place on the same day as the application is made, proceedings on any business postponed as the result of that announcement, may continue, following the conclusion of proceedings on that debate, for the same time beyond the moment of interruption as that taken by the debate, and shall not be interrupted, except as provided in paragraph (2) of Standing Order No. 15 .

 

Second, S. L. Shakdher and M. N. Kaul, in their book entitled Practice and Procedure of Parliament, supra, describe the practice followed in the Lok Sabha – the Indian Parliament - at pages 531 to 532, in the following terms:

 

“Notice of an adjournment motion has to be given before the commencement of the sitting on the day on which the motion is proposed to be made to the Secretary General, copies of which should be endorsed to the Speaker, the Minister concerned and the Minister of Parliamentary Affairs.

 

The expression ‘before the commencement of the sitting’ in the Rules means a reasonable time before the commencement of the sitting so that the notice could reach the Speaker in his office before he goes to occupy the Chair at the commencement of the sitting.

 

...... Keeping in view the need for giving sufficient time to the Speaker to consider notices, it has been laid down that notices of adjournment motions received up to 10:00 hours are valid for that day. In case copies of the notice are delivered after 10:00 hours at the Parliamentary Notice Office, the notice is not deemed to have been received in time and is treated as a notice given for the next sitting.” 

 

The third reference, is to the Republic of South Africa.  In South Africa, a similar provision exists under Rule 130 (1), (3) and (4) of the Rules of the National Assembly, which are expressed in the following terms:

“130 (1)    A Private Member may request the Speaker in writing to schedule, without delay, an urgent matter of national importance by the House.

 

(3)    In granting such a request, depending on the urgency of the matter, the Speaker may at his or her discretion –

(a)    If, on a sitting day, the request is received at least by midday, schedule the discussion for the same day;

  1. If the House is not programmed to meet at an early date that will accommodate the urgency of the matter, convene a special sitting of the House for the discussion; or
  2. Schedule the matter for discussion at the earliest opportunity.

(4)    If the Speaker grants the request, he or she must without delay inform the House, the Leader of Government Business and the responsible Minister of the date and time set for the discussion."

 

Fourth, Standing Order 55 (2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Parliament of Uganda, requires a member to submit to the Speaker, at least two hours before the commencement of the day’s sitting, in writing, the terms of the matter, which he or she intends to discuss when moving an adjournment motion on a definite matter of urgent public importance.  Order 55(2) is expressed in the following terms:

 

“55(2)       A Member desiring to move the adjourn­ment motion under sub-rule (1) shall, save in exceptional circumstances given out to the satisfaction of the Speaker, submit to the Speaker the terms, in writing, of the matter which he or she desires to be discussed at least two hours before the commencement of the day’s sitting.”

 

Fifth, the Parliament of Malawi has a similar provision on matters of urgent and national importance. Standing Order 14 of the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Malawi provides as follows:

 

"Standing Order 14: Matters of Urgent or National Importance

  1. A Member may, after Question time, rise in his or her place and seek leave to move the adjournment of the House for the purpose of discussing a definite matter of urgent national importance.

 

  1. A member who wishes to seek leave to move the adjournment of the House shall, at least one hour before the end of Question time, submit to the Speaker, a written notification of the matter he or she wishes to discuss.

 

  1. The Speaker may allow any request if he or she is satisfied that the matter-
    1. is definite, urgent and of national importance and may properly be raised on a motion for adjournment of the House;
    2. falls within the administrative responsibility of a specified Minister;
    3. is not likely to come before the House by some other means provided for under these rules, and may be discussed under these provisions.

 

  1. The Speaker, if satisfied shall inform the House of the matter and set a time on the same date at which such motion may be moved.

 

  1. The moving of a motion under the provisions of this Rule shall not prejudice the moving of a motion under the provisions of Rule 13 at the same sitting and the motion shall not be votable.

 

  1. The debate on a motion under this Rule shall be limited to thirty minutes and every member shall speak for five minutes."

 

Hon Members, the preceding comparative study amply demonstrates the practice relating to motions of adjournment on urgent matters of public or national importance.

 

4.     What are the general admissibility conditions for a motion of adjournment on a definite urgent matter of public or national importance.

 

In deciding whether or not an adjournment motion is admissible, S L Shakdher and M N Kaul, in their book entitled Practice and Procedure of Parliament, Sixth Edition, (New Delhi, Metropolitan Book Company P.V.T. Limited, 2009), applying the Indian experience, provide lucid and comprehensive guidance on the essential elements that an adjournment motion must fulfil, in order for it to be admissible at pages 533 to 539 as follows:

 

  1. “Ministerial Responsibility: the subject matter of an adjournment motion must have direct or indirect relation to the conduct or default on the part of the Government of India, and must be in the nature of criticism of the action of the Government of India either for having done some action or for having omitted to do some action which was urgently necessary at the moment. An adjournment motion is not admissible at pages 533 to 539 unless there was failure on the part of the Government to perform the duties enjoined by the Constitution, and the law.

 

  1. Matter must be definite: the matter sought to be raised by a motion for adjournment must-
  1. relate to a single specific matter: the motion must not raise more than one issue;
  2. neither be couched in general terms nor cover a great number of cases; and
  3. have factual basis: the mover must be ready with all the facts before he makes the motion.

 

  1. Matter must be urgent: a matter to be urgent must have arisen suddenly in the nature of an emergency…… a matter is ‘urgent’ only if it is of a very recent occurrence and must be raised at the first available opportunity.  Matters arising during the period when the House is not in session, should be raised on the first day the House meets. A matter which has been continuing for some time cannot be raised through an adjournment motion. It has been held (in the Lok Sabha) that an adjournment motion cannot be raised on a matter which can be raised during debate on the Motion of Thanks on the President’s Address, budget discussion, a motion on the international situation.... .

 

  1. Matter must be of public Importance: it must raise a matter of sufficient public importance to warrant interruption of normal business of the House. No hard and fast rule can be laid down as to what constitutes public importance. The question of public importance is decided on the merits in each individual case.” 

 

Further, the same learned authors in emphasising the Speaker’s discretion to allow or disallow such a motion, state, at page 548, as follows:

“The Speaker gives his consent to the moving of an adjournment motion if he is satisfied that the matter sought to be raised is definite, urgent and of public importance..... The refusal to give consent is in the absolute discretion of the Speaker, and he is not bound to give any reasons.”

 

Hon Members, based on the authorities I have cited, I would like to posit as follows:

 

  1. First, an adjournment motion under our Standing Orders 33 and 34, cannot be raised through a Point of Order, because a Point of Order is raised whenever there is an alleged breach or transgression of a Rule of the House;

 

  1. Second, a Member intending to raise an adjournment motion must notify the Speaker in advance of his or her intention to raise the motion.  Upon receipt of the notice, the matter will then be placed on the Order Paper under the rubric;  ‘Applications for leave to move the adjournment under Standing Order thirty- three,’ as provided for in Standing Order 26 (1) (i);

       

  1. Third, thereafter, at an opportune time or juncture during the proceedings of the House, the Speaker, in exercise of his or her discretion under Standing Order 34(3), enquires from the House whether the request for an adjournment motion presented to him by a Member is one that is a definite urgent matter of public importance.  At this juncture the Motion is required to be supported by at least ten Members.

 

  1. Fourth, if the Speaker grants leave, then the Speaker shall, at the appropriate hour, suspend the business under consideration in order to deal with the urgent matter of public importance that has been presented.

 

5.     Lastly, whether Hon J J Mwiimbu, MP’s request to debate an adjournment motion on a definite urgent matter of public importance under Standing Orders 33 and 34 is admissible.

 

It is clear from the authorities cited that, first, prior notice needs to be given to the Speaker before moving the Motion on a definite urgent matter of public importance.  Second, the matter must be definite.  That is, relating to a single matter or issue.  Third, it must not be couched in general terms.  That is, it must be supported with facts.  Or, have a factual basis.  Fourth, it must be urgent.  That is, in the nature of an emergency of a very recent occurrence.  Fifth, it must be a matter of sufficient public importance, to warrant interruption of normal business of the House.  Lastly, the Speaker is reposed with discretion to decide whether or not to admit the Motion.

 

In this case, prior notice of the motion was not given.  Instead, the Motion was sought to be introduced through a Point of Order.  A Point of Order cannot be used to initiate or ignite a debate on a Motion.  The statement itself is not sufficiently supported by facts.  It is evidently couched in very general terms.  The net result is that the purported Motion of an “Adjournment on Definite Urgent Matter of Public Importance,” raised through a Point of Order, is misplaced and therefore, inadmissible.

 

I THANK YOU.

Ruling Date: 
Thursday, March 28, 2019