Parliament speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia has been flayed for justifying his act of barring questions in Parliament related to the 1MDB scandal to the media, instead of the House.

“Pandikar likes to quote back to me one observation I had made in Parliament, that a good speaker does not speak much.

“Pandikar is not only a very talkative speaker, he even holds media conferences to justify his decisions and rulings, some of which are quite high-handed and most indefensible from the standpoint of impartial and independent interpretation of the parliamentary standing orders.

“The best place for Pandikar’s justification of his arbitrary and indefensible rulings and decisions.

“The most recent of which were the rejection of questions from over 30 MPs on the 1MDB scandal and refusal to allow the 1MDB scandal - which had turned Malaysia overnight into a global kleptocracy - to be the subject of debate in Parliament, is in Parliament itself and not in media conferences where the speaker cannot be rebutted by MPs,” said Gelang Patah MP Lim Kit Siang.

Saying this in his speech for DAP's dinner in Skudai last night, the DAP parliamentary leader challenged Pandikar to cite an instance from another Commonwealth parliament where the speaker justifies barring debate on a subject using the excuse of it being sub judice in a foreign country.

On Wednesday Pandikar held a press conference to explain why he had barred a number of questions related to the scandal-ridden Finance Ministry sovereign fund.

Among the reasons he cited was that questions in the House should not be sub judice and affect court cases such as the civil forfeiture suits brought on by the US Department of Justice (DOJ).

This is the first parliamentary session since the DOJ in June made its third filing to seize further assets it claims had been acquired in the US using funds allegedly laundered from 1MDB.

The latest filing puts the total allegedly misappropriated at US$4.5 billion, and the amount sought to be forfeited at US$1.7 billion.

Lim said Pandikar's 'sub judice' excuse was “most ludicrous and indefensible”.

“As if the independence, impartiality and integrity of the American system of justice needs assistance and protection from the speaker of the Malaysian Parliament,” he said.

Motion to review speaker

Lim also asked Pandikar if DAP Puchong MP Gobind Singh Deo's motion to review the speaker’s rulings come up for debate in Parliament next week.

Gobind Singh Deo, who also had questions on 1MDB rejected by the speaker, gave notice on Wednesday of a substantive motion to review the speaker’s rulings.

In first-world parliaments, said Lim, the motion would have come up for debate and a decision in Parliament after a 48-hour notice.

“This will be the proper place and forum for the speaker’s rationale and justification for his high-handed and indefensible rulings to be ventilated, and not at media conferences,” said the veteran MP.

The Gelang Patah MP said Pandikar should let Parliament as a whole decide whether he had abused his powers as speaker in his various rulings, and not let the matter “die undebated on the order paper”.

He reminded the speaker Dewan Rakyat standing order 43 requires only two day’s notice to allow the motion to be debated and resolved.