BN MP moots amending constitution to strengthen parliamentary immunity
PARLIAMENT A BN lawmaker has proposed amendments to the Federal Constitution to strengthen parliamentary immunity, a move that would require the opposition's cooperation for it to be passed in the House.
Che Mohamad Zulkifly Jusoh (BN-Setiu) said the amendments should include wordings that extend parliamentary immunity, to include protecting MPs from police probes unless they commit an offence under the Sedition Act 1948.
"The constitution says nothing about investigations.
"So let's amend our constitution... That would be better than us arguing all the time," Che Mohamad told the House.
PARLIAMENT A BN lawmaker has proposed amendments to the Federal Constitution to strengthen parliamentary immunity, a move that would require the opposition's cooperation for it to be passed in the House.
Che Mohamad Zulkifly Jusoh (BN-Setiu) said the amendments should include wordings that extend parliamentary immunity, to include protecting MPs from police probes unless they commit an offence under the Sedition Act 1948.
"The constitution says nothing about investigations.
"So let's amend our constitution... That would be better than us arguing all the time," Che Mohamad told the House.
Article 63(2) of the Federal Constitution provides lawmakers immunity for actions or speech that are part of parliamentary proceedings.
Article 63(4) however includes exclusions for offences under the Sedition Act and laws enacted under Article 10(4) that protect the national language, Bumiputera quotas and the Malay rulers.
The former Sessions Court judge-turned-MP was responding to Hanipa Maidin (Amanah-Sepang) who asked the Dewan Rakyat to band together to defend parliamentary immunity.
This is after Muhyiddin Yassin (Bersatu-Pagoh) was called to Bukit Aman today to give a statement.
Muhyiddin and two other former cabinet members - Shafie Apdal (Warisan-Semporna) and Husni Hanadzlah (BN-Tambun) - are being probed over their Budget 2017 debate speeches which touched on 1MDB.
Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia reiterated in the House that he only has the power to interpret the Standing Orders and not the constitution.
As such, he said lawmakers should let the courts decide if the case against the former cabinet trio can stick.
He also cited a case where Gobind Singh Deo (DAP-Puchong) successfully challenged the suspension of his MP allowances in court, as a precedent that should be followed.


Are you sure you want to delete this comment?
This action cannot be undone.