KUALA LUMPUR: Several MPs have expressed reservations over a plan to ban MPs facing court charges from House proceedings, saying it would be in violation of the “innocent until proven guilty” principle.Former de facto law minister Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz said he did not agree as any individual, including an MP, cannot be pre-judged.

       “My take is that we should stand on the principle that a person is innocent until they are proven guilty,” he said.

       Nazri was asked to comment on the Cabinet’s approval for new proposed parliamentary reforms that would permit the barring of MPs from Parliament if they are facing trial.

       The Cabinet had agreed in principle yesterday to three matters under the proposed parliamentary reforms.

       Nazri, a senior Umno lawmaker, also pointed out that MPs need to represent the people who have elected them to the Dewan Rakyat.

       “If we bar them just because they are charged in court, we are actually denying the rights of the rakyat who had legally elected the MPs to serve them,” added the Padang Rengas MP.

       PKR’s Kangar MP Noor Amin Ahmad said he too had reservations about barring or suspending MPs charged in court trials.

       “If the trial overlaps with the sitting, they should prioritise the trial over the sitting.

       “If they are convicted, regardless of which court, we can then suspend them. We can work along these lines,” he said.

       However, he welcomed the government’s decision to reinstate the Parliamentary Services Act which was repealed in 1993.

       CLICK TO ENLARGE

       Meanwhile, International Islamic University Malaysia’s Prof Dr Nik Ahmad Kamal Nik Mahmood said denying an MP his right to speak in the Dewan Rakyat before a guilty verdict is handed out can only be done under exceptional circumstances.

       “There is a need to justify such a move, barring conviction.

       “It may be against the principle of natural justice that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty,” he said.

       However, he noted that suspension from duties pending the outcome of investigations is done in the private sector.

       “The law allows employees under investigation to be suspended until investigations are completed,” he said.

       “Suspending an MP pending a court case may thus be done to uphold the dignity of the House.

       “MPs should be free of controversy. Thus, barring them while the court case has yet to be decided may be appropriate,” he added.

       Dr Oh Ei Sun, an adjunct senior fellow at Singapore’s Institute of International Affairs, cautioned that such a provision could be open to abuse.

       “MPs who are charged but not yet convicted should not be barred from Parliament.

       “This is because it could become a convenient tool for political persecution,” he said.

       He felt it was time that a truly independent public prosecution service, which is not beholden to the executive, be set up.

       Universiti Sains Malaysia political science expert Prof Dr Sivamurugan Pandian said: “While it is timely that such reforms are made in line with a memorandum of understanding between the Opposition and government, the proposed amendments are very specific.

       “It involves MPs who are charged but not found guilty,” he said.

       He said the proposed amendments had to be studied thoroughly.