A Parti Amanah Negara (Amanah) lawmaker has posed a slew of hard-hitting questions in response to Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Jamil Khir Baharom's explanation regarding a controversial bill.

Among others, Kuala Terengganu MP Raja Kamarul Bahrin Shah Raja Ahmad asked if the minister was admitting to what he alleged to be a “conspiracy”.

This was after Jamil revealed that the government opted for PAS president Abdul Hadi Awang's private member's bill to amend the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act 1965 instead of tabling its own bill as there were fewer procedural obstacles.

"Does Jamil realise that his statement is an admission that the federal government conspired with PAS to bypass the Federal Constitution and the Malay rulers?

"Is this not an insolent act against the institution of the Malay rulers?" questioned Raja Kamarul.

Over the weekend, Jamil said if the bill was initiated by the government, it would need the consensus of 14 states and then later the National Islamic Council and the Conference of Malay Rulers.

Raja Bahrin noted that the Conference of Rulers' previous call for the government to review the National Security Bill 2016 which granted the prime minister emergency-like powers was ignored.

"Are these an indication that the government is heading towards absolute power, disregarding the voice and role of the Malay rulers?

"Is this the attitude of a government that claims to protect the constitutional monarchy as enshrined in the Federal Constitution?" he asked.

Raja Bahrin also questioned if PAS understood its role in the matter.

"Is PAS aware that it was being used by Umno?

"Is Umno and PAS clinging on to each other to remain in power while sidelining the rights of the Malay rulers?" he added.

Meanwhile, constitutional law expert Abdul Aziz Bari said the argument (about the government taking over Hadi’s Bill) is messy, adding that the government should have thought it over from the beginning.

"The tabling of the Bill was done with the knowledge of the government. So why only now the issue (of consensus) is raised?

"Whether it is a private member’s bill or a government bill, if the matter belongs to the state, then you cannot avoid that.

"It appears to me at least that this argument is an afterthought. It sounds messy. Kelam-kabut. The thinking should have been done from the moment the government decided to move on with the bill.

He added that legally, there was no question on whatever matters that belonged to the state, it would remain with the state.

"I also feel that the whole thing will eventually be withdrawn because of the issue of consensus within BN component parties."

MCA had always argued that any government bill would need the consensus of component parties, he added.

Malaysiakini has contacted Jamil Khir for comment and is awaiting his response.