Tuesday, 3 March 2026

Rights activist Peter John blasts Zaid Ibrahim over his unwarranted comments on Sarawak and Sabah

KUCHING, March 3 2026: State rights activist Peter John Jaban has slammed former Law Minister Zaid Ibrahim over his unwarranted comments on Sarawak and Sabah, with regards to Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63).

Peter John Jaban says  political leaders who play games with constitutional promises are betraying the very foundation of Malaysia. 

He said Zaid’s comments are not just disappointing, but are also insulting, reckless, and show a blatant disregard for the constitutional position of East Malaysia.

“As a Sarawakian who has witnessed our people’s struggles firsthand, I find Zaid’s statement offensive and dangerously misleading,” Peter said when asked to respond to Zaid’s comments posted on X (formerly Twitter) yesterday.

Peter reminded Zaid that Sabah and Sarawak are not a ‘burden’ on Malaysia, saying that “We are equal partners, bound by MA63, with rights and autonomy that must be respected.”

“To dismiss our legitimate demands for justice, development, and recognition as mere political inconvenience is either an act of ignorance or a deliberate attempt to centralise power at the expense of the Borneo states,” Peter, who is also the founder of Saya Anak Sarawak (SAS) state rights movement, said.

He reminded that leadership is not about belittling others, it is about protecting the integrity of the nation.

He said political leaders who play games with constitutional promises are betraying the very foundation of Malaysia.

“We will not stay silent while our contributions and rights are ridiculed.”

He said framing Sabah and Sarawak’s pursuit of their constitutional safeguards as a game of “outwitting Malaya” is arrogant, condescending, and offensive.

“MA63 was never a political stunt, but is a binding agreement that formed the foundation of Malaysia,”he said, reminding that reducing it to sarcasm insults the law, history, and the people of East Malaysia.

He said both  Sarawak and Sabah did not “outwit” anyone, stating that “we formed Malaysia as equal partners, with safeguards to protect our autonomy, identity, and resources.

“Raising these issues today is not hostility, it is asserting our rights under the law and the promises that built this nation,” he said.

Peter said, Zaid, being a former law minister, should understand that constitutional agreements are not political talking points to be mocked.

“They are the backbone of the federation. Disagreements must be resolved with legal reasoning and respect, not dismissive rhetoric that deepens mistrust between regions.

“Remarks like these confirm a long-standing perception certain West Malaysian elites continue to view East Malaysian concerns with disdain.

“This dismissive attitude is exactly why MA63 remains a vital and sensitive discussion. Malaysia deserves mature, fact-based discourse not provocative soundbites and belittlement.

“National unity cannot be built on sarcasm or mockery. It requires respect, constitutional integrity, and recognition of historical commitments,” Peter said, stressing that if political leaders claim to care about unity, they must start by respecting the rights of Sabah and Sarawak.

“Anything less is a betrayal,” he said.

 Zaid Ibrahim, as always,  has oblique views on Sarawak and Sabah, as far as the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) is concerned.

On a X post yesterday, Zaid he has always admired Sarawak and Sabah, he said: “Their latest political plan, called the Borneo Bloc, is an example of how smart they are to continue to outwit and control Malaya.”

He said 70 years ago, they asked their British masters to let them join Malaya on terms favourable to them; hence, MA 63.

“They tell the world that, together with Malaya, they formed Malaysia as partners when in truth they were merely British colonies.

“Whitehall (the British government) and Lee Kuan Yew (then Prime Minister of Singapore) negotiated for them very good terms.

“That's why they can decide whether to allow us to visit them, but we can't work there. Even when doing business, you must venture with them,” he claimed.

“Then they now challenge our laws: the Law of the Sea, PDA (Petroleum Development Act), Petronas and whatever else.

“There are still 30 items, they say still outstanding from MA63. They get 40 per cent of the revenue. It is endless,” Zaid wrote.

“With the Borneo Bloc and the demand for more parliamentary seats, they are in a good position for years to come.

“They said the Borneo Bloc is to give them balance and a negotiating position. No, they already have that; now they want control,” he wrote.

Happy Chap Goh Meh to all from this hybrid family

This hybrid family (Iban champur China)  wishes to say "Happy Chap Goh Meh" celebration to all relatives and friends wherever you may be. It is a time to have a hearty and big makan.

Chap Goh Mei (or Chap Goh Meh) means "the 15th night" in the Hokkien dialect, marking the final day and first full moon of Chinese New Year celebrations, also known as the Lantern Festival (Yuan Xiao Jie).

It is a time for family reunions with festive meals (like Yuan Xiao or Tang Yuan), lanterns, fireworks, and traditionally, a "Chinese Valentine's Day" where single people toss oranges into rivers to find love (I am not sure if this tradition is still being practised by single people). 

Zaid Ibrahim gets harsh criticims from netizens over his oblique views on Sarawak and Sabah

KUCHING, March 3 2026: Former Law Minister Zaid Ibrahim’s oblique views on Sarawak and Sabah, especially with regards to Malaysia Agreement  1963 (MA63), have received overwhelmingly negative responses from netizens from the two Borneo regions.

Caption: Former Law Minister Zaid Ibrahim gets brickbats from netizens over his oblique views on Sarawak and Sabah 

They said Zaid has twisted the purposes of MA63, claiming that it is used by Sarawak and Sabah to control and outwit Malaya.

I used to look up to him. Then I realised that he is a venomous chameleon,” fumed one netizen.

Another said the narrative that Sabah and Sarawak are outwitting and controlling Malaya is not only misleading, it is historically and constitutionally flawed.

The formation of Malaysia in 1963 was not manipulation. It was a negotiated federation between Malaya, Sabah, Sarawak and Singapore under the Malaysia Agreement 1963.

Sabah and Sarawak were not simply handed over as passive colonies,” netizen explained, saying the Cobbold Commission gathered views from the people of Sarawak.

He  then said safeguards were drafted, terms were agreed and there was a constitutional nation building, not political trickery.

He also noted that the immigration autonomy in Sabah and Sarawak is also not discrimination, pointing out that it is a constitutional safeguard that was agreed upon at the formation of Malaysia and is recognised under the Federal Constitution.

On petroleum and maritime issues, he said discussions surrounding the Petroleum Development Act 1974 and the role of Petroliam Nasional Berhad are legal and constitutional matters.

In any federation, questions about jurisdiction and revenue sharing are normal. Addressing outstanding matters from MA63 strengthens the federation because it shows that agreements are respected,” the netizen said.

As for the Borneo Bloc, political alliances are a normal feature of parliamentary democracy. When parties in the peninsula consolidate power, it is called strategy. When Borneo parties seek collective bargaining strength, it is suddenly framed as control.

That double standard says more about political insecurity than constitutional imbalance,” he opined.

Another netizen said “how silly this former law minister is...and knowing very little of the Borneo bloc...I don't know about Sabah but in my opinion, Sarawak is not interested in controlling Malaysia or power to rule Malaysia,” he said.

But, he said,  over the years we have been treated poorly and unfairly.”

He said the attitude of the former law minister shows a real West Malaysian attitude wanting to exercise authority and as if we (Sarawakians” are second class citizens.

Another netizen dismissed Zaid simply as an armchair critics while another netizen asked Zaid to get his fact right, saying that Sarawak and Sabah did not join Malaysia, but negotiated through the MA63 as founding partners and you guys never honored the agreement that was made.

Another netizen said many Malayan politicians have poor knowledge on the history on the formation of Malaysia.

That's why until today they don't know how to interpret the MA63,”he said.

A netizen, by the name of Joe Wong, said it is up to Sarawak and Sabah to voice out their 63-year grievances and frustrations regarding unfairness and inequalities done by the Malayan leaders.

Don't blame others, blame yourself and the other Malayan leaders who created a lot of problems.

Who did all these? You incompetent Malayan leaders.

These are the true facts. So you better keep quiet... lah, Zaid,” Joe Wong concluded.