Rights to Shut Up?

I'm quite fascinated about this Cambodian parliment regulation that doesn't allow a less-than-10-member party to debate in the National Assembly. What are their roles then in the parliment? Aren't they also representatives of a group of people who appointed them to talk on their behalfs?

While the regulation is adopted from other well established constituations in countries such as France and Britain, I strongly oppose the rule as i don't think it's rational, fair, or just to do so.

CPP lawmaker Jeam Yeap commented that it is regulated so that the time can be better controlled for each member to speak up as there are quite a number of them there. But i don't think it is at all a good reason for that all of them are supposed to finetune their policies, strategies, and goals - especially the recently debated national budget - to the best for the country. It should take quite some time to do that and i doubt how long the parliment was spending on discussing the issue. Furthermore, i think not all those CPP and SRP lawmakers would be talking as they've supposedly dicussed among their groups before the meeting. Adding few more crops of people wouldn't take that much of time, and it's theoretically even more important when those are from adversary groups.

Yeah although i don't like the Human Right party, especially the leader, i think they should have the rights to express their ideas in the parliment.