By VOON LEE SHAN, Parti Bumi Kenyalang (PBK) President
Following the Prime Minister’s meeting of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 Implementation Action Council (MTPMA63) in Kota Kinabalu on Friday.,
Parti Bumi Kenyalang calls upon the Federal Government to move beyond discussions and deliver a comprehensive and time-bound settlement of the constitutional and political issues arising from the formation of Malaysia.
The Prime Minister’s presence in Sabah, together with the participation of the Premier of Sarawak and the Chief Minister of Sabah, demonstrates that the implementation of MA63 remains a matter of national importance.
However, PBK’s position goes further.
PBK maintains that the validity, foundation and continuing constitutional consequences of the Malaysia Agreement 1963 must be examined honestly and without political fear.
Our position is that there are serious historical and constitutional questions as to whether the Malaysia Agreement was validly implemented in accordance with all of its essential terms and safeguards.
PBK also maintains that, even assuming that MA63 was validly implemented, the constitutional circumstances and foundations upon which Malaysia was formed were materially altered by the separation of Singapore from Malaysia in 1965.
These are legitimate constitutional and political questions which must not be treated as taboo.
MA63 itself records that North Borneo and Sarawak, together with Singapore, were to be federated with the existing States of the Federation of Malaya and that the resulting Federation was thereafter to be called Malaysia.
The original constitutional structure of 1963 also expressly distinguished the States of Malaya from the Borneo States of Sabah and Sarawak.
PBK therefore rejects any historical narrative which treats Sarawak and Sabah merely as ordinary administrative units of Malaya.
They were founding Borneo States and constituent parties in the formation of Malaysia, with special constitutional safeguards and arrangements arising from MA63 and the constitutional instruments associated with it.
The constitutional settlement must therefore be restored and respected in substance, not merely in words.
THREE STEPS TO SETTLE THE ISSUE
PBK proposes three immediate steps.
FIRST — RESTORE THE CONSTITUTIONAL POSITION
The Federal Government must review and, where necessary, repeal, amend or restore every provision of the Federal Constitution which has diminished, altered or failed to give effect to the constitutional position, safeguards and rights originally secured for Sarawak and Sabah.
The objective must be to restore the constitutional balance contemplated at the formation of Malaysia, including the distinct position of the Borneo States within the Federation.
This must not be reduced to changing terminology alone. Constitutional recognition must be accompanied by the restoration of the substance of the rights and safeguards.
SECOND — RESTORE ALL RIGHTS AND POWERS TAKEN AWAY
The Governments of Sarawak and Sabah must jointly demand from the Federal Government the restoration of all constitutional, legislative, administrative and financial rights, powers and safeguards which were transferred, reduced, diluted, altered or otherwise taken away contrary to the constitutional settlement associated with MA63.
This should include a comprehensive review of matters relating to legislative and executive powers, immigration, financial rights, natural resources, development, public administration and other safeguards specifically applicable to Sarawak and Sabah.
The Federal Government must provide a clear list of outstanding matters, a timetable for implementation and a mechanism for independent verification.
THIRD — A FINAL CONSTITUTIONAL DEADLINE
There must be a definite and short timetable for the Federal Government to complete the restoration of these rights.
This cannot continue indefinitely from one negotiation to another, from one committee to another and from one Prime Minister to another.
If the Federal Government is unwilling or unable to complete the constitutional settlement within the agreed timetable, then the Governments and peoples of Sarawak and Sabah must consider, through lawful, democratic and constitutional means, what further constitutional options are available to them.
PBK does not advocate violence, disorder or unconstitutional action.
But PBK will not accept the proposition that Sarawak and Sabah must remain permanently bound by an arrangement merely because successive governments have failed to honour its constitutional spirit and safeguards.
The separation of Singapore in 1965 demonstrates that the constitutional structure of Malaysia is not immutable. Singapore’s separation was ultimately effected through constitutional and legislative instruments.
The lesson for Sarawak and Sabah is that constitutional arrangements can be changed when the political will exists to do so.
PBK therefore calls for political courage, not endless negotiation.
If Malaysia is founded upon a constitutional partnership, then that partnership must be honoured.
If rights were promised, they must be restored.
If constitutional safeguards were agreed, they must be respected.
And if the existing constitutional arrangement can no longer fairly accommodate the legitimate aspirations of Sarawak and Sabah, then the people must be allowed to debate openly, peacefully and democratically what constitutional future they wish to pursue.
The time has come for the Federal Government to provide a definitive answer.
MA63 MUST NOT REMAIN AN UNFINISHED PROMISE.
Sarawak and Sabah deserve a constitutional settlement that reflects the terms, spirit and safeguards upon which Malaysia was formed.
