KUCHING, September 21, 2018 - Sarawak Sabah Rights
Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ) non-governmental organisation (NGO) president
Robert Pei, a Sarawak born Australian lawyer, has responded sceptically to what
he called the latest “token gesture” made by Prime Minister Mahathir on
Malaysia Day September 16 2018, to
“restore” Sabah and Sarawak Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) status as “equal
partners” and lost special rights under the buzz slogan of “New Malaysia” or
“Malaysia Baru”.
 |
| Robert Pei |
He said full restoration of Sabah Sarawak MA63 rights
meant reinstating Sabah Sarawak to their 1963 positions by the repeal of the
series of federal laws which were passed since 1965.
This would also involve the repeal of the Petroleum
Development Act 1974 or alternatively to exclude its application to Sabah and
Sarawak.
In addition, the issue of distribution of one third
Federal Parliament seats to each of the two states since Singapore’s 1965 exit
must be resolved.
However, Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad contradicted his
Malaysia day statement and cast doubts on his sincerity in a comment reported
on 18 Sept 2018 (quote) “I think we should learn to live together and be fair
to each other”.
Dr Mahathir tried to qualify the extent of the
restoration by saying that Petronas should not be bankrupt by giving 20%
royalty to the “oil states” but failed to point out that 100% of Sabah Sarawak
petroleum wealth have been enriching Petronas and Malayan states since 1976.
This includes the Prime Minister’s family Government
Linked Company (GLC) which benefited as one of the 6 “favoured” Malayan companies linked to
servicing Petronas.
Pei said that the
Prime Minister’s Malaysia Day statement amounted to an admission that the
Federal Government’s unfair treatment and deprivation of Sabah Sarawak MA63
status and special rights was a material breach of fundamental terms of the
international treaty that created Malaysia.
MA63 is governed by international law on treaties and the
breach may be treated as a termination of MA63 according to established
international law principles and the treaty would be null and void and no
longer binding on the Borneo states.
He said the fundamental MA63 terms were used to induce
Sabah and Sarawak to give up their demands for national independence in 1963
and form a union with Malaya.
UK and Malayan governments had assured the Borneo people
that they would not be “re-colonized” and
impressed on Borneo leaders that this was the only way they could
achieve “security and prosperity” backed up by guarantees of “equal partners”
status with regional autonomy and special rights.
However over five decades the treaty was torn up by the
federal government as “equal status” and autonomy rights were taken away.
If the founding reason or rationale for the federation
has ceased to exist then MA63 is just a dead treaty and no longer binding on
Sabah and Sarawak. That opens up several options for the 2 states to consider.
He said this situation puts the Sabah and Sarawak
governments in a very strong position to disregard any further “negotiations”
on restoring their stolen state rights and demand immediate action to restore
those rights. If MA63 is null and void, they are also in position to consider
re-negotiating a new federal treaty arrangement for a “Malaysia Baru” (if they
have the people’s mandate) or even look at the option to become independent
states which is supported by a widespread sentiment in the two states.
Pei said the series of Federal laws which had the effect
of voiding MA63 include the Constitution and Malaysia (Singapore Amendment)
Act, 1965, (CMAA65), Continental Shelf Act 1966 (CSA66 lapsed in 2011)
Petroleum Development Act 1974 (PDA74) , Act 354 1976 (amending Article 1 of
the Federal Constitution), and the Territorial Seas Act 2012 (TSA2012) which
took away Sabah Sarawak special rights were illegal back door amendments of the
MA63 treaty.
This was also a violation of international law principle
that a treaty cannot be amended without the consent of all the signatory
parties.
He explained that the Constitution and Malaysia
(Singapore Amendment) Act, 1965 was an Act passed by the Malaysian Parliament
to allow Singapore exit from the federation in August 1965.
It had the effect of altering the agreed international
boundaries of Malaysia and destroying the basis of four countries for forming
the federation.
Singapore exit was done without Sabah and Sarawak consent
and participation and also prompted their attempts to “secede” from the
federation.
The CSA66, PDA74, ACT354 and TSA2012 had altered and
reduced the agreed pre-1963 territorial boundaries of Sabah and Sarawak to
enable the federal government seizure of their territorial water resources, in
breach of MA63.
He pointed out that the Art 1(3) of Federal constitution
(which was authorized by MA63 and read subject to the treaty as the supreme
document establishing the federation), specifically recognized Sabah Sarawak
territorial boundaries as those fixed by the former British colonial government
in 1956 and reinforced by the Oil Mining Ordinance 1958 which applies to both
states.
[Art. 1(3) states: “Subject to Clause (4), the
territories of each of the States mentioned in Clause (2) are the territories
comprised therein immediately before Malaysia Day”.]
He believes it is quite impossible for the new Federal
Government to make more than just a nominal restoration of the states “equal
partner status”, which is on its face a straight forward parliamentary voting
exercise.
But to be seen as genuinely wanting to be fair and just,
the Pakatan Harapan government must move a motion to declare as
unconstitutional and repeal the PDA74, ACT354 and TSA2012 and all legislation
which had violated MA63.
The Sabah and Sarawak governments should be more than
happy to oblige by instructing their federal parliament members to support the
PH government which would (presumably) then have the 2/3 majority to
constitutionally repeal these laws as stated by the Prime Minister.
He may have been referring to ACT 354 as a 2/3 majority
is only necessary to amend ACT 354 which was a constitutional amendment. But it
seems unnecessary to have a 2/3 majority to repeal the other acts as done with
the repeal of CSA66 and the Internal Security Act 1960. These were not Acts
specifically intended to amend the Federation Constitution.
However, he pointed out that it was not just a matter of
restoring the 2 states’ “regional autonomy” status but also repairing the
deleterious social economic impact on their people after 5 decades of federal
neglect and federal pillage of their petroleum wealth.
The PDA74 forced this wealth to be unfairly and unjustly
shared out to 11 Malayan states for their development while Sabah and Sarawak
were reduced to the 2 most poverty stricken, backward and dependent vassal
states.
He asked “How is the Federal government going to
adequately compensate and to make up for what the Sabah and Sarawak people have
been deprived of for all those years?”
In relation to this he asked if the PH government was
going to dismantle the UMNO race religion discriminatory policies which denied
education and employment opportunities to several generations of Sabah and
Sarawak youths who did not received a proper education in a dysfunctional
education system, scholarships and entry to institutions of higher education
and employment.
He asked how was justice going to be done for the large
landless class of former NCR landowners created by land grabs by local BN
governments and cronies under Federal watch, bearing in mind that Malaysia was
“formed” on fundamental promises given to defend Sabah Sarawak bumiputra
rights?
Pei said that the
Sabah and Sarawak governments should no longer continue to defer to their
Malayan “big brothers” and stand up as equals to assert their rights.
In fact the re-branded GPS government has revealed that
the Sarawak government was subjugated and made subservient to decades of UMNO
coercive control which explains why many anti-Sarawak federal laws were passed
with Sarawak votes.
On this score both past Sabah and Sarawak governments
have acted against the interest of their own rakyat and not stood up for them
when their MA63 and human rights were being taken away by the Federal
Government.
He said now that the UMNO BN regime has met its historic
end and in line with the new federal government’s professed upholding of
democracy and fairness and justice, both the State governments have a chance to
stand up and firmly defend the people’s rights and need not cower before their
Malayan equals anymore. They must take control of their country’s destiny and
assert the people’s right to real self-determination.
No comments:
Post a Comment