PETALING JAYA: Proposed guidelines to curb discussions on race, religion and royalty (3R) in the Lower House must strike a careful balance between preserving national harmony and safeguarding parliamentary freedom.
National Advisory Unity Council member Prof Datuk Dr Awang Azman Awang Pawi said such guidelines could provide a necessary framework to prevent the exploitation of 3R topics, which risk inflaming polarisation in today’s highly reactive, media-saturated political environment.
“But the principal risk lies in their potential to evolve into a form of soft censorship if interpreted too broadly or applied selectively.
“Parliament must remain a forum for substantive debate, including on sensitive matters, provided such discussions are conducted responsibly and grounded in evidence.
“A genuine balance can only be achieved if the guidelines do not prohibit 3R discourse outright but instead regulate the manner in which it is articulated and anchored in facts, free of incitement and aligned with public accountability,” he said when contacted yesterday.
The National Unity Ministry is drafting guidelines to prevent Members of Parliament from raising sensitive 3R issues during debates in the Dewan Rakyat.
Deputy Minister R. Yuneswaran said the report will be submitted to Dewan Rakyat Speaker Tan Sri Dr Johari Abdul soon.
Prof Awang Azman said that Johari’s role is pivotal in ensuring enforcement remains procedural rather than political.
He also said the classification of what constitutes sensitive content must not be left vague or subject to ad hoc interpretation.
He proposed three key criteria, including the intent and context of the speech, whether analytical, policy‑oriented or provocative; the content, whether supported by credible data; and the potential impact, particularly if it could incite hatred, discrimination or social discord.
“Consistency can be sustained through a transparent written code of conduct, a body of Speaker’s rulings that establish precedents and an internal parliamentary review mechanism insulated from executive influence.
“Without these structural safeguards, 3R guidelines risk being perceived as a selectively applied political instrument, thereby undermining rather than strengthening the institutional legitimacy of Parliament,” he said.
Meanwhile, Bukit Bendera MP Syerleena Abdul Rashid said while the intent to maintain harmony is vital, any guideline must not be so restrictive that it discourages meaningful debate or prevents MPs from addressing real issues affecting unity, policy and governance.
She said that if MPs are afraid to discuss 3R issues, it risks creating a Parliament that appears polite on the surface but is disconnected from reality.
“In a country like ours where 3R are deeply personal and sensitive, we cannot afford reckless statements, especially in Parliament, where every word carries weight.
“Silencing discussion does not resolve sensitivities; it often pushes them into less accountable spaces,” she said.
“What we need is not less speech, but more responsible speech. As MPs, we carry a duty to be factual and constructive in how we engage on these matters.”
She added that the guideline must clearly distinguish between speeches that incite or provoke and those that question or seek solutions, as they are not the same and should not be treated as such.
“Any guideline, no matter how well-intentioned, can be misused if it is vague or inconsistently applied,” said Syerleena.
“If one MP is allowed to speak freely, and another is shut down for raising a similar issue, that is when trust breaks down.
“At the end of the day, Parliament should not be a place where we avoid sensitive issues, but should be the one place where we handle them properly with facts, respect and genuine intention to build a better Malaysia.
“Because if we do not lead that example inside Dewan Rakyat, we cannot expect it outside,” she added.
