Does the Speaker of Parliament need to send his resignation letter to the PM?

Introduction

Our dear Speaker of Parliament, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia (“Pandikar”) decided to resign as Speaker of Parliament. He wrote a resignation letter and went to pass it to the Prime Minister (“PM”). The PM refused to accept it, convinced Pandikar to stay on, and kapish! Pandikar decides to retract his resignation! So let’s take a step back, is there really a need to send a letter to the PM?

Resigning as Speaker of Parliament

The resignation of the Speaker is provided for under Article 57(2), which states, “the Speaker may at any time resign his office by writing under his hand addressed to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, and shall vacate his office…” Alright, for starters, the letter must be addressed to the Clerk of the House of Representative, and not the PM. In fact, nowhere does it mention that he needs to communicate it to the PM.

Next, what does the word “addressed” entail? Must the letter have been received? Is it sufficient if the letter was written and dispatched? Must there be an acceptance on part of the clerk? There is no proper precedent here on how the word “addressed” is to be applied. It is useful to look to India, which is the primary source of reference for the development of Constitutional law in Malaysia.

Examples in India

India has a similar provision under Article 94 of its Constitution, the difference being that the letter must be addressed to the Deputy Speaker, for the resignation of the Speaker, and the reverse for the Deputy Speaker. There are two occasions in which the term “addressed” was applied.

On 7^th March 1956, M.A. Ayyangar resigned as Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha (lower house of Indian Parliament). The position of Speaker at that time was vacant. For his resignation to be complete, it was sufficient for him to have addressed the letter to the Speaker and to have sent it to the Office of the Speaker. There was no need for an acceptance.

A better example was the intended resignation of G. Laskhmanan as Deputy Speaker of the Lok Sabha. He sent his letter on 25^th June 1983 to the Speaker. The Speaker’s office only received it on 29^th June 1983. However, on 27^th June 1983, he sent another letter retracting his resignation. The matter was referred to the legal department for a legal opinion on the legality of his retraction. Ultimately, it was concluded that the world “addressed” entails that it would be insufficient if the letter is put in the course of transmission. It is only complete when the Speaker receives the resignation letter, which in this case was date of receipt on the registered post, i.e. 29^th June. Therefore G. Lakshmanan’s resignation was inchoate and his retraction was valid.

Ultimately, all that is needed is for the letter to have been received. There is no need for a form of acceptance, or in other words, there is no room for a rejection.

Conclusion

Pandikar seemed to have adopted this position as well when he was reported as having said, “There is no need for others to announce that the Speaker has resigned. If the prime minister won't accept my resignation, I myself can announce it”.

Therefore, there is really no need for any form of notification to the PM. Perhaps it is done as a matter of convention or tradition. All that is needed is a resignation letter addressed to the Clerk and sent to him. If at all Pandikar wishes to resign again, there is nothing the PM can do to stop him.