The Court of Appeal today directed the prosecution and defence to conduct more research in the sedition case of incumbent Padang Serai MP N Surendran.

This is for the parties to assist the court in deciding whether it was proper to hear the striking-out application when the law where Surendran was charged in 2014 had been repealed in 2015.

Justice Badariah Sahamid, who led the three-member panel, said both parties should file submissions on the matter.

"Is it proper for the court to decide when the law is not applicable now? It would make a mockery of the judiciary to decide on a law which is not applicable, as this would affect the administration of justice,' she added.

Sitting with Justice Badariah were Justice Mary Lim and Justice Harminder Singh Dhaliwal.

Surendran, who is also a lawyer, was charged with sedition for questioning the administration of justice during a case management of Anwar Ibrahim's Sodomy II appeal in 2014.

He was charged in the Sessions Court in Kuala Lumpur on Aug 19, 2014, for his remark that the the Sodomy II charge was a political conspiracy involving caretaker prime minister Najib Abdul Razak.

Surendran was accused of saying this to reporters when leaving the Federal Court in August 2014.

However, the provision under Section 3(1)(c) of the Sedition Act to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in Malaysia or in any state, the charge preferred against Surendran had been amended and repealed.

Today the bench posed several questions to DPP Wan Shaharuddin Wan Laden, whether it was proper to hear the case and whether the prosecution had decided on the letter of representation.

Wan Shaharuddin admitted receiving the letter of representation but has yet to reply.

He then indicated that the Attorney-General's Chambers had rejected the letter of representation, which prompted Justice Harminder to ask why the defence was not informed.

Lawyer Gurdial Singh Nijhar, who appeared with senior counsel Ambiga Sreenevasan, said they had applied to the High Court to strike out the charge citing the law which was repealed.

The High Court dismissed the application and hence the appeal. Surendran is also challenging the constitutionality of the charge.

Justice Badariah has fixed May 28 to hear the case.