Robert Pei, President of Sabah Sarawak Rights Australia New Zealand (SSRANZ) NGO, answers questions on MA63 implementation.
1. WHAT DO YOU THINK NOW OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT'S PROGRESS IN IMPLEMENTING THE FULL ESSENCE OF MA63 FOR SARAWAK?
The Federal Government faces significant challenges in fully implementing the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) due to numerous unconstitutional alterations that have shifted the agreed Malaysia concept from a secular multi-cultural state to one dominated by race and religion.
These changes have eroded the original terms and conditions of MA63, making it impossible to fully restore the "lost rights" of Sarawak
(and Sabah) even if unconstitutional laws are repealed.
The Federal Government has neither the capacity nor the willingness to compensate Sarawak and Sabah for the extensive economic and developmental losses sustained over the past 60 years. Since the negotiations began on the restoration of MA63 rights in 2015, there has been a significant delay, with issues like the Sabah 40% revenue entitlement remaining unresolved.
Additionally, a thorough legal review of the validity of MA63 is essential, as its legitimacy would impact the foundation of Malaysia, focusing on the issue of whether Sarawak and Sabah were legally incorporated as part of Malaysia. The inquiry should examine whether MA63 was validly made when 3 of the signatory parties were British Crown Colonies not sovereign states with the legal capacity to make binding international treaties and
whether the people's informed consent was given to form Malaysia. Alternatively, if MA63 was valid the numerous violations of foundational terms suggest that the agreement might be effectively terminated, questioning the binding nature of the federation.
2. WHAT IN YOUR OPINION ARE SOME OF THE MOST CRUCIAL ASPECTS OF AUTONOMY (FUNDING, ETC) FOR SARAWAK THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE URGENTLY INTRODUCED?
Subject to MA63 being valid, full autonomy or Borneanisation should be prioritised as was originally agreed in 1963. This includes de-Malayanisation of Sarawak’s government machinery, restoring full control over internal affairs, education, finances, and resources, and repealing all federal laws that infringe upon Sarawak's MA63rights. Achieving true autonomy involves undoing the colonial-like control imposed by Malaya and ensuringthat Sarawak has the power to govern its own affairs independently.
3. ARE YOU SATISFIED WITH HOW THE SARAWAK GOVT HAS DEALT WITH THE FEDERAL GOVT IN THIS RESPECT?
No, the Sarawak government remains subservient to the Malayan federal government despite claims of being "equal partners." The government has not taken significant steps to reclaim control over Sarawak’s oil and gas resources, administration, and education. The Sarawak government’s handling of the 2018 Petronas PDA74 court case, where they accepted a "commercial settlement" instead of asserting their superior legal claim, illustrates this subservience. While the Sarawak government is undertaking various development projects, it has not addressed the fundamental MA63 terms such as Borneonisation and the repeal of unconstitutional laws affecting Sarawak's rights.
4. DO YOU THINK THAT THIS PUSH FOR AUTONOMY HAS GROWN STRONGER SINCE PM ANWAR TOOK OFFICE? WHY/WHY NOT?
The push for autonomy appears to have grown stronger, partly due to underlying popular discontent over poverty, education, and development issues, and resentment over the exploitation of resources for Malaya’s benefit. The Sarawak government’s assertiveness is also a response to the revival of nationalist movements and social discontent. The fall of the BN after decades of one-party rule has allowed the Sarawak power elites to assert themselves more boldly, re-branding from PBB to GPS and claiming to fight for Sarawakians' rights.
However, there are still significant breaches of MA63 that challenge the credibility of both the federal and Sarawak governments in restoring Sarawak's rights. This relates to the series of unconstitutional legislation which removed Sarawak-Sabah MA63 rights from 1965 to 2021, especially 1965 S’pore Separation Act, CSA1966, ACT 354, PDA74 and TSA2012.
To fully restore those rights all these laws must be repealed. Neither the Federal Government nor the Sarawak Government are willing to do this as it will create a huge crisis in Ketuanan Melayu (KM) hegemony of Malaya and possibly end the Madani government's stay in power and as well as challenging GPS’ lopsided KM rule of Sarawak.
5. WHY DO YOU THINK THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IS STILL LACKING IN SOME ASPECTS WHEN IT COMES TO FULLY IMPLEMENTING MA63?
The Federal Government's reluctance to fully implement MA63 and de-colonize Sarawak stems from a desire to maintain control over Sarawak and Sabah and the benefits that come with this control.
Repealing unconstitutional laws and fully restoring MA63 rights would threaten the political legitimacy of Malaysia, which is based on an ideology of race and religious supremacy. The federal government is unwilling to make the necessary changes that would disrupt this hegemony.
6. WHAT DOES A SUFFICIENTLY AUTONOMOUS SARAWAK LOOK LIKE TO YOU, HOW DO YOU ENVISION IT TO BE?
A sufficiently autonomous Sarawak would have self-rule, free from Malayan control of its internal affairs, resources, and finances, and the repeal of laws that affect MA63 rights. Autonomy was a foundational condition for the federation, meant to replace post-colonial administration with local governance.
However, Borneonisation has been replaced by Malayanisation, effectively turning Sarawak into a colony under Malayan control. Achieving autonomy would mean reversing these trends, repealing unconstitutional laws, and allowing Sarawak to govern itself independently, similar to the original intent of MA63.
7. SOME HAVE ALSO CALLED FOR AN INDEPENDENT SARAWAK. WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THIS?
Given the failure to realize the goals and benefits of “independence in Malaysia,” especially when Sarawak was induced to give up real independence for federation with Malaya, exit and independence seem to be the only routes for true self-determination for Sarawak. International law does not prohibit secession, and Sarawak has the intrinsic right to leave the federation if desired.
The Sarawak-Sabah demand for an Exit clause in the MA63 discussions was dismissed by IGC Chairman Lord Lansdowne in 1963 when he stated that "any state voluntarily entering into a federation has the intrinsic right to secede at will and therefore it was unnecessary to include in the Constitution".
It is always claimed by federalists that Malaysia was a free association but in the same breath, they argue that Point 7 of Sabah's 20 Points, prohibits "secession". Sabah's 20 Points Memorandum is not a legally binding agreement and it was not even signed by Malaya which insisted on Point 7. This was excluded from the amended 1957 Federal Constitution adopted as the Malaysia Constitution.
If MA63 is proven to be invalid in a UN international court of law, Malaysia would be shown to have been “formed” without a legal basis. Then UN assistance must be sought to peacefully gain independence. Malaya must forthwith return sovereignty and territory to Sarawak and Sabah.
A political party elected on the promise of seeking independence would have the mandate to take appropriate action, including declaring a unilateral declaration of independence (UDI) or conducting a referendum. The GPS party should not obstruct the pursuit of independence, as true self-determination is the ultimate goal for the people of Sarawak.
Robert Pei
SSRANZ President,
3 July 2024.
