Both the terms “political coward” and “biadab,” as used by Violet Yong and Speaker Asfia, are arguably unparliamentary and inappropriate in the context of parliamentary proceedings. However, the fundamental question is one of responsibility: *who initiated the confrontation, and who subsequently escalated it?*

One cannot reasonably provoke a dispute and then expect to be immune from criticism or rebuttal. If you start the fire, you must be prepared to face the consequences of your own words and actions. Nevertheless, any response must remain proportionate and within the bounds of parliamentary rules and decorum.

Parliament is a forum for reasoned debate, scrutiny and the exchange of ideas, not a venue for personal attacks or a coffee-shop shouting match reminiscent of a mafia film. The strength of a parliamentarian lies not in the volume of their voice or the severity of their insults, but in the substance of their arguments, the precision of their language and their ability to persuade through facts and logic.

*A parliamentary sword is a powerful instrument; wield it with discipline, precision and strategic wisdom.* Its purpose should be to dismantle an opponent’s arguments, expose inconsistencies and hold those in power accountable—not to descend into personal vendettas. The most effective political response is one that defeats an opponent intellectually and withstands public scrutiny, parliamentary procedure and the rule of law.

Voon Lee Shan,
President
Parti Bumi Kenyalang