Casuists among the Pakatan Rakyat MPs, and there are many, may hold a slight but simmering resentment against Speaker of the House, Tan Sri Pandikar Amin Mulia, to the point that he was told off as someone who “should not speak too much.”

That argument, now solidified among the Oppositionists, reached a threshold of no return after Lim Kit Siang (DAP-Ipoh Timur) nettled the Speaker head-on at the height of maddening security gridlock emasculating the Parliament House perimeters.

After the unsurprising defeat yesterday of the motion of no confidence pledged against the Prime Minister filed by Opposition leader Datuk Seri Dr Wan Azizah Ismail, the DAP strongman, oversubtle and sly reasoner as ever when he surfs on the morality board, took the floor to attempt a different but brusque tact – cite the Inspector-General of Police to the Rights and Privileges Committee for failing to ensure a smooth passage for members to Parliament House.

In between trying to deliver his motion to cite the IGP, Pandikar Amin rejected Kit’s regulatory assault but interjected livid remarks that forever branded him the reputation of a dogmatic and pedantic Speaker unwilling to cut some slack for MPs to present offbeat arguments.

The Speaker's pedantry was put under the microscope again by Kit and M. Kulasegaran (DAP-Ipoh Barat), as they labelled the Pandikar Amin’s autocracy as "too interventionist", grumbling that MPs, particularly from the Opposition, had difficulty debating openly when the Speaker had the tendency to butt in tenaciously.
It started when Pandikar Amin cut short a point raised by Lim, who had jumped in into the moment when the Speaker had a beef over points raised by Kulasegaran during the debate on the Judges' Remuneration (Amendment) Bill 2008.

Like the time he questioned the Deputy Prime Minister for clarifying the PM’s 9MP Mid-term review speech that led to an Opposition walkout, Kit walked the same delicate line in questioning just how on earth did Minister in the PM’s Department, Senator Datuk Mohd Zaid Ibrahim, secure the locus standi to table the motion to debate the bill, particularly after PR marked the Minister’s stretch of absenteeism during the MTR debate.

Pandikar Amin immediately smelled a rat, proclaiming that Kit’s point was made with a “bad intention.” “I must point out when an infringement is made against the Point of Order. The point raised is unrelated to the debate and I advised YB Ipoh Timur to include it when it is his turn to debate the bill.”

A disgusted Kit had enough. A revolt is pullulating. Following up on his reproach on the Speaker yesterday, he raised the House temperature by a few degrees when he slammed Pandikar Amin for being "too interventionist."

A Speaker, the upbraided Kit growled, should refrain from getting in the way of debates taking place in the House. "The Speaker's job is to run the House, not to get involved in the debate.”

Kulasegaran added an analogy for the Speaker’s behaviour: “The Speaker's role is similar to a judge where he should listen to the debate and only intervene in extreme cases.”

Predictably, Pandikar Amin took up the position of an open-hooded King cobra, recoiled himself in a hissy fit and then plunged his venomous fangs into the two MPs.

“MPs are to blame for excessive intervention from the Speaker, as they themselves do not follow the rules and regulations of the House set by the Point of Order,” went Pandikar Amin’s remonstration. “With all due respect, most MPs do not understand the Standing Order. I will not get involved in debates but if there is an infringement of a Point of Order and if I were to ignore it, that is when you start pointing fingers. I prefer not to get involved in any debate, provided that members do not overstep the Points of Order.”