PARLIAMENT | Dewan Rakyat Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia today railed against MPs who question the reasons behind his rejection of their questions.

Charles Santiago (PKR-Klang), had asked Pandikar to reconsider the rejection of his motion to debate the issue of child poverty in Malaysia.

However, Pandikar lamented that MPs would be happy if a particular ruling was to their liking, but some would even resort to calling for him to resign if the ruling was unfavourable to them.

It is believed that he was referring to three DAP MPs who yesterday demanded his resignation for disallowing an emergency motion on the seizure of a luxury yacht linked to businessman Jho Low and questions related to 1MDB.

As Santiago stood up to respond to Pandikar, the speaker told him to sit down, citing Sections 41, 42, 43 and 48 of the Parliamentary Standing Orders.

"Sometimes, those who raise issues are legal practitioners. That's why I read from this," said Pandikar, holding up a book and thumping it.

"In interpreting the standing orders, the speaker does not need to give reasons," he said.

Citing the time of a former speaker, the late Mohamed Zahir Ismail, in which action was taken against a lawmaker for not agreeing on a ruling, Pandikar lamented that today there were MPs who not only failed to follow the speaker's orders but have challenged him to resign.

"What if some of you were to sit here one day and then someone challenges you to resign if the ruling does not suit your taste?" he asked.

As Santiago (photo) attempted to speak again, Pandikar told the Dewan that he would not hesitate to take action against those who protested the rejection of their questions.

He then asked G Manivannan (PKR-Kapar) whether he wanted to leave the Dewan as the latter stood up and tried to explain his party colleague's reason behind submitting the motion.

The speaker also noted how the three MPs did not say anything on the day he rejected their motion to discuss the luxury yacht, but had asked him to resign the day after.

"Sometimes I become sick in reminding (MPs) to read Section 23(1)(c) of the standing orders, which states that a question should not contain any opinion, argument, ironical or offensive expression.

"I can reject your question if I interpret it as being ironical or offensive. Meaning, I have the right to read your question from your perspective (or) mind," he said.

'Commit contempt'

Pointing out how the standing orders were in place even before his time as speaker, Pandikar wondered whether certain MPs believed that their opinions were the most comprehensive.

"That it must be followed, as though you have a big licence when the one with the big licence, according to the standing orders, is the speaker.

"It's the speaker who has the big licence to use this blue book," he said, referring to the standing orders.

Despite Pandikar's warnings, Chong Chieng Jen (DAP-Bandar Kuching) and Sim Tze Tzin (PKR-Bayan Baru) tried to ask Pandikar the reasons behind his rejection of their questions.

Pandikar told the two that he would respond to them in writing.

Sepang MP Hanipa Maidin then asked Pandikar when he would give his explanation, and questioned him about not following the law.

"You said that we should follow the law. I agree with that. But what if you, yourself, do not follow the law? What if you commit contempt?"

Telling Hanipa to sit down, Pandikar said this was an example of questions that "make me sick".

"Are you saying that we shouldn't follow (the standing orders)? That's why I said the one who can interpret it is only the speaker," Pandikar said.

As Hanipa stood up to speak again, Pandikar told him to cease.

"Yang Berhormat, enough. If you stand up again, I will ask the bentara (sergeant-at-arms) to take you outside," he said.