The National Assembly rules allow members to raise a point of order regarding the interpretation or enforcement of the rules or constitutional articles governing Assembly business. Such points must concern the business before the Assembly at that moment. A member cannot raise a point of order to ask for information, explain their own position, when a question is being put to the Assembly, or on a hypothetical matter. The Speaker’s decision on any point of order is final and not debatable, though the Speaker may hear members before giving a ruling.

The rules also permit members to raise matters that are not points of order but concern the federal government. These may be raised only during the time the Speaker sets aside for such matters — the last half-hour of a sitting, except on Fridays.

The distinction between the two mechanisms is worth understanding. A point of order relates to the rules or the Constitution and can be raised at any time during a sitting; it is decided by the Speaker alone. A matter raised under the last half-hour provision must be primarily the concern of the federal government and can only be raised during that designated time. The two should not be confused, and raising a general grievance as a point of order is a misuse of the procedure.

Why it matters for the National Assembly proceedings?

Points of order are frequently misused — raised to delay proceedings, score political points, or introduce extraneous matters. The rules are clear that a point of order is not a vehicle for information-seeking or general grievance. The Speaker’s power to decide without debate prevents procedural paralysis, but this makes the impartiality of the Chair all the more important. When the Chair is perceived as selective in admitting or dismissing points of order, it undermines confidence in the Assembly’s proceedings.

What is in it for citizens?

When Assembly proceedings are interrupted by points of order, citizens should know that the rules require each intervention to be genuinely about the rules or the Constitution. A member who uses a point of order to make a political speech, seek information from a minister, or delay a vote is misusing a procedural right. The Speaker’s discretion in deciding what qualifies as a valid point of order is one of the most significant and most frequently exercised powers in the Assembly chamber — and one of the clearest indicators of whether the presiding officer is acting impartially.

Source: Rules 17 & 18, Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 2007

The proceedings of the National Assembly are governed by the Rules of Procedure and Conduct of Business in the National Assembly, 2007. The current rules were passed on 23 February 2007 and have since been amended 21 times, most recently on 22 October 2024.

This post is part of FAFEN’s series on parliamentary literacy. Read more of this series here.