A tense exchange erupted during yesterday’s Parliament session over the purpose and implications of forming a parliamentary investigation committee into job vacancies and unemployment files at the Labour Ministry.
The row began when Strategic Thinking Bloc spokesman MP Khalid Bu Onk claimed that the creation of the investigation committee was aimed at ‘shielding’ officials from parliamentary scrutiny.
He claimed that once such a committee is formed, it effectively blocks MPs from directing questions or raising related issues.
His remarks drew a sharp rebuttal from services committee vice-chairman MP Abdulwahid Qarata. “These are unacceptable allegations, and there is no need for political grandstanding over the performance of MPs,” he said.
“We have exercised our constitutional tools and our constitutional right to form an investigation committee.”
The dispute unfolded after foreign affairs, defence and national security committee vice-chairman MP Abdulla Al Romaihi requested that the Labour Minister’s response to his parliamentary question be included on the session’s agenda.
He expressed frustration that several ministerial replies had not been scheduled on the grounds that a parliamentary investigation committee was already examining the same issues.
However, the head of Parliament’s Legal Advisors Commission Dr Saleh Al Ghathith, clarified that Parliament’s internal bylaws do not allow any matter to be discussed in a plenary session if it is currently under review by a parliamentary committee – unless an MP submits a request for a vote, supported by convincing justifications.
Deputy head of the investigation committee into employment vacancies and Parliament’s legislative and legal affairs committee chairman MP Mahmood Fardan, questioned the rationale behind voting to include the minister’s reply, noting that the subject of the question overlapped directly with the committee’s mandate.
Mr Bu Onk countered that the parliamentary questions directed to the Labour Minister had been submitted before the formation of the investigation committee, arguing that the restriction should therefore not apply.
Dr Al Ghathith responded by stressing that the bylaws make no distinction between questions submitted before or after a committee’s formation, stating broadly that discussion is prohibited if the issue has been referred to a committee.
The debate highlighted growing tensions within the chamber over the balance between investigative committees and direct parliamentary debates.
This is Parliament’s final term, expected to end in May, before parliamentary elections are held later this year.
&uuid=(email))