Sabah and Sarawak issue: from a legal standpoint

suppadmin | October 29, 2016

The recent issue that a majority of Sabah and Sarawak MPs supported the amendments in 1976, which lumped the Borneo States on the same level with other states originally under the Federation of Malaya, would still happened despite the objection of even two third of the lawmakers at the time. This is because in 1976, the state of emergency was still in operations.

Political activist ZainnalAjamain, in a recent published news item, commented that the issue was irrelevant.

This is because no matter what, it would have been useless because under the state emergency, the Prime Minister can make the decision by himself and gazette it without the need to debate the issue in Parliament.

Therefore there is no point of bickering who supported it or otherwise. The outcome would have been the same.

Zainnal pointed our however that the only issue to point out is the fact that former CM Tan Sri Harris Salleh had acknowledged that he was not consulted on the matter and the state government under his watch did not give any consent to the federal government to make the amendment.

Those pointing fingers blaming past leaders for the predicament Sabah and Sarawak are facing now should realised that the amendment done was unconstitutional and that the Malaysian parliament erred when it decided to amend the Article 1(2).

Malaysia practises constitutional supremacy and not parliamentary supremacy, and the parliament cannot do as they like. When parliament made the changes by passing a law without abiding to procedures set out, such law is illegal and not enforceable.

This requirement is even more important when it comes to Sabah and Sarawak as both states are protected by the Inter-Governmental Report and the Malaysia Agreement 1963. The approval and consent from both the states are necessary for any changes in the Constitution.