“Still in the process of appealing. Still another level of appeal after this one. So in the meantime I can still contest,” he told FMT in an SMS reply.

It was reported last week that Khalid was willing to give up his seat to Mohamad Sabu, as he understood it was important for the Amanah party president to contest in a seat that was deemed to be “safe”, such as Shah Alam, which has a good mix of Malay and non-Malay voters.

Khalid was also reported to have said that he was not prepared to contest against his brother Shahrir, the Johor Baru MP, as that would not please their mother.

The Amanah communication chief said if he lost the final appeal at the shariah court, he could start another process in the civil court.

He could not be contacted to get more details of his appeal in the shariah court.

On Jan 19, Khalid was fined RM2,900, in lieu of three months’ jail, by the lower shariah court in Klang for giving a religious talk without credentials.

He was found guilty of delivering a talk at a surau in Taman Seri Sementa, Klang, without valid credentials in 2011, in contravention of Section 119 (1) of the Selangor Islamic Law Administration Enactment.

Khalid claimed he was invited to the surau to speak about his trip to Palestine and not to give a religious lecture.

He had filed his appeal in the shariah high court and the final avenue to set aside the conviction and sentence is the Selangor shariah appeals court.

It is unclear at which court the appeal is pending.

Article 48 of the Federal Constitution states that a MP is disqualified from duty if he is convicted of an offence by a “court of law” in the federation and sentenced to a jail term of not less than one year or a fine of not less than RM2,000.

Retired Federal Court judge Gopal Sri Ram had said that Khalid’s “criminal wrong” was not a penal offence, as passed by Parliament and executed through a civil court.

“The present court (the Selangor shariah lower court ) is also not a court of law established under Article 121 of the Constitution,” he said.

He said article 48 has to be read harmoniously with Article 121.

Sri Ram said shariah courts established by the states could only punish Muslims for going against “the precepts of Islam”.

However, academician and constitutional law expert Prof Dr Shad Saleem Faruqi said the constitution did not distinguish between the civil, criminal and shariah courts when it came to a conviction.

“Article 48 (1) (e) clearly states that an MP can be disqualified if he has been convicted of an offence by a court of law in the federation unless he has obtained a royal pardon,” he said.

Institute of Islamic Understanding Malaysia’s Centre for Shariah, Law and Politics fellow associate professor Dr Shamrahayu Abdul Aziz agreed.

She said the shariah court, though a state court, was within the federation.

Today, Sri Ram said Khalid should file for a declaration in the civil court to determine if he was qualified to contest.