Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Azalina Othman Said may have usurped the Dewan Rakyat speaker's power in issuing a blanket ban on questions pertaining to the RM2.6 billion donation scandal, as such a decision is not within her purview, argued opposition MPs.

"She's not the chair, it's not for her to decide. Azalina has overextended her powers as minister in charge of parliamentary affairs," Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo said during a press conference at the parliament lobby today.

Gobind said the Standing Orders make it clear that only the speaker can make such a decision.

Asked if Azalina was usurping the speaker's powers in doing so, the DAP lawmaker said: "It seems so."

He cited Standing Order 36(2) which states, "reference should not be made to any matter which is sub judice in such a way as might in the opinion of the chair (speaker) prejudice the interest of parties thereto."

He said this means that only the speaker can decide if a matter is sub judice, and even then only after the question is asked.

Azalina had said earlier today that no more questions on the RM2.6 billion donation can be asked in the House.

She said this is because the ongoing judicial review of attorney-general Mohamed Apandi Ali's decision to absolve Prime Minister Najib Abdul Razak of wrong doing in the donation case, would make such questions subjudice.

Gobind however pointed out that the review, filed by the Bar Council, has not yet been granted leave, and as such the matter has not yet become the subject of a trial and hence not yet sub judice.

Sepang MP Hanipa Maidin concurred, adding that there are legal precedent that filing a review application does not automatically mean the review will be heard.

Najib was dogged with allegations of graft and questions on his accountability after admitting to receiving a donation of RM2.6 billion into his personal account, though he has denied misusing public funds for personal gain, and dismissed such allegations as a plot to topple him.

Apandi has cleared Najib of criminal wrong doing in the case after deciding not to prosecute the case, citing no evidence of any offence when investigation papers from the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission on the matter and other funds from SRC International allegedly banked into the PM's account was sent to his office.

The AG returned the papers to the MACC and ordered that the cases be closed. It was this decision that is being legally challenged by the Bar Council.