By Daniel John Jambun, President Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo)
KOTA KINABALU: Borneo’s Plight in Malaysia Foundation (BoPiMaFo) takes note of a recent report by the New Straits Times quoting a law lecturer who asserted that Sabah and Sarawak are merely “equal to other states” within the Federation of Malaysia.
Such a statement reflects a narrow and incomplete reading of Malaysia’s constitutional history.
Malaysia was not created by simply enlarging the Federation of Malaya. Rather, Malaysia was established through the Malaysia Agreement 1963 (MA63) — an international agreement concluded between four distinct political entities: the Federation of Malaya, North Borneo (Sabah), Sarawak and Singapore.
This fact alone distinguishes Sabah and Sarawak from the eleven states in Peninsular Malaysia.
None of the eleven states of Malaya entered Malaysia through an international treaty. They were already constituent states within the Federation of Malaya formed in 1957.
Sabah and Sarawak were not.
Both territories agreed — though reluctantly — to form a new federation called Malaysia on 16 September 1963, after being assured that specific safeguards would be put in place to protect the political rights, autonomy, and identity of the Borneo states.
These assurances were reflected in negotiated constitutional safeguards including the 20-Point Agreement for Sabah and the 18-Point Agreement for Sarawak.
Among the matters safeguarded were:
1. Immigration autonomy
2. Control over land and natural resources
3. Religion
4. Language
5. Representation in Parliament
These provisions were necessary precisely because Sabah and Sarawak were not ordinary states within Malaya, but territories with their own political institutions, administrative systems, and constitutional expectations.
If Sabah and Sarawak were intended to become merely ordinary states like those already existing within the Federation of Malaya, there would have been no need for the Malaysia Agreement 1963 or for the extensive constitutional safeguards negotiated at the time.
The constitutional structure at the birth of Malaysia reflected this reality.
Prior to the 1976 amendment to Article 1(2) of the Federal Constitution, the Constitution clearly organised the Federation into three territorial components:
1. The States of Malaya
2. The Borneo States (Sabah and Sarawak)
3. Singapore
This constitutional structure recognised the distinct origins of Sabah and Sarawak within the federation.
The historical understanding of these safeguards was also symbolically affirmed through the Batu Sumpah Keningau, where solemn assurances were given to the people of the interior of Sabah regarding key matters including religion, land rights, and native customs.
For the people of Sabah, the Batu Sumpah was not a mere ceremonial monument. It was a solemn declaration intended to reassure native communities that their fundamental rights would be protected within the new federation.
The continued perception that these assurances have not been fully honoured has contributed to a growing sentiment among many Sabahans that the constitutional spirit under which Sabah agreed to form Malaysia has been progressively diluted.
Ignoring the historical significance of Batu Sumpah risks reinforcing the perception that the commitments made to the Borneo states during the formation of Malaysia are being treated as symbolic relics rather than solemn undertakings.
Reducing Sabah and Sarawak to the same constitutional standing as states that were already part of Malaya before 1963 disregards both the historical process that created Malaysia and the international agreement upon which it was founded.
It also ignores the political reality that the peoples of Sabah and Sarawak agreed to the formation of Malaysia only on the basis of specific safeguards designed to protect their autonomy, identity, and interests.
The 2022 amendment restoring the wording of Article 1(2) reflects Parliament’s acknowledgement that the earlier formulation had failed to adequately capture the historical context of Malaysia’s formation.
Let it be remembered that Sabah and Sarawak did not join Malaysia as mere extensions of the Federation of Malaya.
Malaysia itself came into existence because these Borneo territories agreed to form a new federation based on specific safeguards and solemn assurances.
Those safeguards were not symbolic gestures. They were the conditions upon which Malaysia was formed.
If those commitments are gradually ignored, diluted, or reinterpreted out of existence, then the question that must be asked is not whether Sabah and Sarawak are “equal to other states.”
The real question is whether the constitutional promises made to the Borneo states in 1963 are still being honoured in good faith.
History will record clearly that Malaysia was created through agreement — not absorption.
