The final appeal of former Selangor menteri besar Dr Mohd Khir Toyo, which was scheduled for hearing in the country’s highest court today, has been postponed to an undetermined date.

Federal Court corporate communications head Mohd Aizuddin Zolkeply said the postponement was due to reasons that “cannot be avoided by the court”.

"Hence, the appeal has been taken out. A date for the hearing will be decided later," Aizuddin said.

He said the parties have been informed about the postponement.

It is learnt that decision to postpone the matter could be due to the incompatibility of the court panel.

There were two panels sitting in the Federal Court today, with a total of 10 judges.

Justice Abu Samah Nordin cannot sit in the panel hearing the Khir appeal because he headed the bench in the Court of Appeal when the first appeal was heard.

Khir was found guilty by the Shah Alam High Court in 2011 of corruptly obtaining two pieces of land and a bungalow when in public office.

The court imposed a 12-month jail sentence as well as the seizure of his property. However, it granted a stay of execution pending appeal.

The Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision last year.

Gobind’s case postponed

The apex court also postponed the appeal by the Dewan Rakyat chief, then-minister in the PM’s Department Nazri Aziz and the government against Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo, after he had been successful in getting remuneration despite a suspension order being made against him.

This follows an application being made by Sangeet Kaur for Gobind, who informed the court that there is another similar matter pending for decision before the Federal Court.

The pending decision that Gobind awaits is the Teng Chang Kim and two others versus Raja Ideris Raja Ahmad and two others.

Chief Judge of Malaya Zulkefli Ahmad Makinuddin, who was leading the panel, noted that the judgment for the other case is ready and is being drafted.

“I know this as I also sit in that panel. We will allow the postponement to March 27,” said Zulkefli.

The appellants referred three questions of law namely

  • Whether Article 62(1) of the federal constitution read with Standing Order 44 (8) of the Dewan Rakyat empowers parliament to take disciplinary action on its members via a motion on the breaches and privileges and punishable with suspension without remuneration;
  • Whether the legislature has any inherent powers and jurisdiction to discipline its members on any charges of breaches of rights and privileges and contempt of the House;
  • And if the answer to the above question is positive, whether the passing of a motion in parliament constitutes a proceeding in parliament and hence protected by Article 63(1) of the federal constitution.
At the Kuala Lumpur High Court, Gobind managed to get his remuneration despite the suspension as it ruled that the House (parliament) had no power to impose punishment in withholding remuneration as such power or privileges does not exist in the House of Commons.

The decision was also upheld by the Court of Appeal, and hence resulting in the appeal by the parliament and government.