The High Court in Kuala Lumpur today struck out a suit by Petaling Jaya Selatan MP Hee Loy Sian to challenge Dewan Rakyat speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia's decision to not allow questions related to 1MDB to be raised in Parliament.

This came with Justice Kamaludin Md Said allowing the application from the speaker and his secretary's to strike out Hee's application.

According to lawyer and Padang Serai MP N Surendran, there were no grounds given by Justice Kamaludin.

"We are disappointed and will appeal this decision as it is a serious matter of public interest.

"The speaker is bound by the constitution and if MPs cannot raise questions related to 1MDB, where else can these be raised?" Surendran asked. 

No order was made as to costs.

Hee, who was also present, said that he has also submitted two questions related to 1MDB in this coming parliamentary session.

It was reported that Hee, a second term PKR MP, had on Aug 2 last year filed the originating summons where he named Pandikar (photo above) and Dewan Rakyat secretary Roosme Hamzah as defendants.

This came after Pandikar rejected more than 30 questions related to 1MDB at the last parliamentary session.

Pandikar had defended his decision, saying there were rules and procedures which must be followed, including that the questions might contain accusations, were based on assumptions, were offensive, or made up.

Hee had sought clarification from the home minister regarding the whereabouts of Penang-born businessperson Jho Low and the latter's alleged dual citizenship, which had been rejected by the speaker.

Hee is seeking a declaration that the speaker's act of rejecting the questions on 1MDB is unconstitutional and void.

Meanwhile, at the same court, Justice Kamaludin postponed in delivering his decision in the judicial challenge mounted by former MP Tawfik Ismail (photo below) in prohibiting the speaker from allowing the tabling of the amendment to the Syariah Courts (Criminal Jurisdiction) Act (Act 355), to Thursday.

Tawfik's lawyer Rosli Dahlan said the judge needed time before delivering the decision as the case is "slightly different", as it was made not within the House, but outside the proceeding.

"We are making the challenge based on Article 38 of the Federal Constitution, where laws on Islamic matters should have been brought before the Conference of Rulers first, for the go-ahead, as Islamic matters are under the state powers," he said.

Hence, it is slightly different from Hee's case, Rosli added.