1MDB questions rejected because of sub judice, says Pandikar


Diyana Ibrahim

Speaker Pandikar Amin Mulia says he had to consider the possibility that the questions and answers could affect the party suing or being sued in the suit filed by the United States Department of Justice in the United States. – The Malaysian Insight pic, July 27, 2017.

SPEAKER Pandikar Amin Mulia today defended his rejection of questions on 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB) from opposition MPs in the Dewan Rakyat, citing sub judice.

He said he feared the questions could be subjudice as the civil suit filed by the United States Department of Justice (DoJ) was ongoing.

“As the Speaker, I have to consider the possibility that the questions and answers could affect the party suing or being sued, or the ongoing trial,” he said in a press conference in Parliament  today.

He said this in response to the allegations of opposition MPs that Pandikar had rejected more than 30 questions on 1MDB because they were “hurtful”.

At the same time, Pandikar said he expected the opposition to attack him for citing sub judice as the reason for his refusal to allow 1MDB questions, by arguing that the suit was not taking place in Malaysia but in the United States.

Pandikar preempted that argument, saying that the Parliament Standing Orders did not restrict sub judice to events happening in Malaysia.

“They will laugh at me. They will say, how can it be sub judice when the trial is in the United States?

“But take a look at the Standing Orders, which say that members of Parliament cannot debate on matters ongoing in court. They do not say only in Malaysian courts.

“And if they argue that the court case in the US has got nothing to do with Malaysia, then I will use the same argument to ask them, if it has  nothing to do with Malaysia, then why have 1MDB questions been brought up while investigations have not yet been concluded,” he said.

Furthermore, he said, not all questions on 1MDB were rejected.

He said 19 questions related to 1MDB were approved and listed in the Order Paper.

“The ones I accepted were not mentioned. Only those rejected were highlighted. It looks like they have a political agenda, but don’t drag me into it and make it look as though I am not doing my job. I feel offended,” he said, admitting that the opposition MPs have managed to provoke him with their allegations.  – July 27, 2017.


Sign up or sign in here to comment.


Comments