This article first appeared in The Edge Financial Daily on March 7, 2018

KUALA LUMPUR: The Dewan Rakyat Speaker rejected an emergency motion filed by a Pakatan Harapan lawmaker yesterday that called on the government to explain its decision not to claim the US$250 million (RM975 million) yacht Equanimity that was confiscated by Indonesia.

Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia rejected the motion by Gooi Hsiao Leung (PKR-Alor Setar) as it did not fulfil Section 18(7)(c) of the Standing Orders and had gone against Section 23(1)(c) and (g).

Section 18(7)(c) allows the speaker to refuse any motion presented to him if it contravenes the Standing Orders, while Section 23(1)(c) states that questions submitted should not contain any argument, interference or opinion, or be deemed trivial.

Section 23(1)(g) states that questions submitted in the Dewan Rakyat should not be prejudicial to a court case.

Seeking further explanation for the rejection, Gooi argued that Equanimity could have been bought using public funds and so it was important for the government to find out if it belongs to the country.

“All we want is for the prime minister to be here and explain the matter, on why the attorney-general (AG) said he is not going to recover the yacht, as it could have been stolen from the country,” he said.

Pandikar said there is a “direct link” between the confiscation of the yacht and the investigation led by the US Department of Justice (DoJ) into funds allegedly misappropriated from 1Malaysia Development Bhd (1MDB), and hence he did not want to revisit his previous ruling to reject discussion of matters under the investigation.

“That (the confiscation) is in the process of being investigated by the DoJ, and I have studied your motion before I rejected it,” he said.

“We have to remember there is separation of powers. Other institutions [such as the AG] have their own powers, and we should let them do their jobs.”