Opposition key in making laws

As a young lawyer, I had the privilege of working alongside Justice Elton Singini, SC, a luminary in the field of legislative drafting.

His wisdom continues to resonate in the legal community, particularly that perfection in drafting remains an elusive ideal.

This principle helped me realise that, as a legislative drafter, my influence over a Bill’s ultimate form and quality is limited. It is, in fact, the rigorous scrutiny and impassioned debates within the legislative House that wield the true power in shaping the destiny of legislation. Regrettably, the significance of these debates is all too frequently overlooked as their immense potential to yield laws of exceptional quality often goes unappreciated.

Before a Bill ever sees the light of day in Parliament, a dedicated drafter endures sleepless nights meticulously sculpting each sentence. The process is marked by intricate sentence construction, deletion and reconstruction, all in pursuit of an elusive perfection.

However, the true essence lies in recognising that the fate of the legislation is not solely sealed within the drafter’s chambers, but in Parliament where the law takes its final shape.

Parliament’s pivotal role in moulding the quality of legislation cannot be overstated. The heartbeat of this transformation is the spirited debate that unfolds within the House. The time allocated to discuss Bills during these deliberations serves as the linchpin to the ultimate quality of legislation once it passes parliamentary scrutiny.

In Malawi, an overwhelming 99 percent of bills introduced in the House emanate from the government side. Only a few make it to the legislative agenda as private member’s business.

Arguably, the laws predominantly reflect the government’s priorities, a phenomenon that is entirely legitimate. However, the crux of the matter lies in the meticulous scrutiny and transformation of these bills within the legislative process.

Naturally, it would be unrealistic to anticipate the government side to subject its own Bills to rigorous debate and extensive revisions.

After all, these Bills are often conceived as the government’s own brainchild and craftsmanship. Consequently, the government is typically prepared and inclined to endorse the Bills as presented.

Thus, the pivotal role of refining and elevating the quality of a proposed law, once it reaches the legislative arena, predominantly falls within the purview of the opposition benches.

The dynamics of legislative debates in Parliament are profoundly influenced by the delicate equilibrium of power between the government and opposition factions, a balance often measured by their respective voting strengths.

When the government side boasts a significant numerical advantage, it inevitably expedites the legislative process.

The swift passing of Bills, politically speaking, is not inherently problematic.

However, the collateral impact of this numerical imbalance is a reduction in the time allocated for comprehensive debate and scrutiny.

Such circumstances tend to constrict the opportunity for meaningful opposition input, resulting in Bills that may be glossed over and inadequately examined.

The consequences are far-reaching, potentially leading to hastily crafted or poorly considered policies.

This intricate interplay underscores the paramount importance of preserving a robust democratic equilibrium.

Such equilibrium necessitates extensive debate and meticulous scrutiny, guaranteeing the enactment of legislation that is both of high quality and attuned to broader societal interests.

How can this equilibrium be effectively attained?

Perhaps, it is high time we realised and accepted that in the grand theatre of parliamentary democracy, the role of the opposition in debating Bills is not ornamental, but essential to the robust functioning of our lawmaking processes.

As we navigate the complexities of crafting effective legislation, we must recognise the pivotal importance of a vibrant and engaged opposition.